{UAH} Judge raps DPP’s office over malicious prosecutions-museveni courts
|
3:18 AM |
No comments |
Judge raps DPP's office over malicious prosecutions
Monday February 15 2021
Justice Lawrence Gidudu. FILE PHOTO
Summary
- Justice Gidudu in his ruling of February 10, held that the office of the DPP should be above petty machinations by its investigators who should not manufacture evidence against suspects to fight their own wars.
Justice Lawrence Gidudu of the Anti-Corruption Court has scoffed at the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the criminal investigators for charging out of malice some of the suspects facing money related offenses.
Justice Gidudu in his ruling of February 10, held that the office of the DPP should be above petty machinations by its investigators who should not manufacture evidence against suspects to fight their own wars.
"This application has exposed the criminality that goes on behind the scenes before some people are charged in court. The DPP has the discretion to decide on who to charge in court but malice or bad faith should never be part of that discretion," Justice Gidudu scoffed at the DPP and investigators' adding: "The office of the DPP should be above petty machinations by its investigators and should supervise them instead of being influenced by them."
Justice Gidudu's bitterness followed an application in which a city lawyer, Paul Wanyoto Mugoya had sought court's intervention after he was maliciously added onto a charge sheet after a property sale deal went bad in which an investigating officer played the part of a broker.
Mr Wanyoto in his affidavit before court states that he was approached by a police officer known as Hassan Mutyaba who introduced him to another officer, Sgt Joshua Oumo, who was an investigating officer in a certain case.
The two police officers told him that a suspect in their custody, Mr Allan Kantu, was selling his land and wanted a quick buyer to solve his problems.
AdvertisementThe core reason he wanted to quickly and cheaply sell his land was to bribe the investigating officer to release him on police bond.
Mr Wanyoto went on to buy the land in question located in Busiro Block 312 at Kalambi at Shs40m.
But following his release on bond, Mr Kantu met Mr Wanyoto and pleaded with him to return his land since he sold it cheaply because he was under duress as he was being tortured and wanted to regain his freedom by bribing the investigating officer.
Out of compassion, Mr Wanyoto agreed to return Mr Kantu's land, which he (Kantu), in turn, sold at it Shs120m and paid back his (Wanyoto) Shs40m.
However, his woes started when Sgt Oumo felt cheated in brokerage commission fees and kept on demanding more from Mr Wanyoto.
This saw Sgt Oumo charge Mr Wanyoto for allegedly acquiring property arising from proceeds of crime under the Anti-money laundering laws.
Sgt Ouma was recorded boasting of how he would maliciously add Mr Wanyoto onto the charge sheet of six suspects who were separately facing several charges of obtaining money by false pretense, cheating, and money laundering. Mr Kantu who had cheaply sold the land to Mr Wanyoto was part of the six people on the charge sheet.
The six were charged out of claims that they defrauded one Ssuuna Dauda of Shs1.2b by false pretense.
According to court documents that this publication has seen, between April and July 2018 six people allegedly defrauded Mr Ssuuna, a businessman of Shs1.2b which they obtained in various installments purporting to help one of the suspects get his Shs18.5b which was in dfcu bank but frozen by Bank of Uganda.
The Shs1.2b was to offer bribes to officials in the Bank of Uganda to unfreeze the said Shs18.5b claimed to be compensation from Uganda National Roads Authority (UNRA).
"The audio was played in court. It runs for 26 minutes. It is a casual conversation between people familiar with each other. The subject of discussion is a strategy to fix the 1st applicant (Mr Wanyoto) by slapping charges against him to pay back for a deal gone bad. It revealed the underworld of some investigators in manufacturing evidence against people they disagree with," justice Gidudu held.
"But before I take leave of this matter, I would like to express my concerns about the manner in which investigators deal with cases involving money and exhibits before deciding to charge suspects in court.
"There is strong evidence to prove that the charges against the 1st applicant (Mr Wanyoto) were slapped upon him in bad faith. I am satisfied that the 1st respondent (Sgt Ouma) has abused his mandate as an investigator to cause charges to be preferred against a buyer of the property where he was a broker," he adds.
Disclaimer:Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.To unsubscribe from this group, send email to: ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ugandans at Heart (UAH) Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ugandans-at-heart+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ugandans-at-heart/CADNbrTn1DUbm2O9J6kuDOvupCfp3EyUZ3uqrOMk%3DJn8h_DQNxg%40mail.gmail.com.
0 comments:
Post a Comment