Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

HC: Anti corruption Division (Uganda)

The Anti-corruption Division of the High court was established in July 2008 by the Judiciary as a specialized Division to adjudicate corruption and corruption related cases. The Division commenced hearing cases in December 2008.

The Establishment of the ACD was a deliberate step by the Judiciary, in response to demands by Government and other institutions engaged in fighting corruption, to take drastic action against the corrupt by strengthening the adjudicatory mechanism for fighting corruption.

The Principal Judge administratively set up the ACD, as a specialized Division of the High Court to adjudicate corruption cases. The Chief Justice would like to formally establish the ACD through a Practice Direction.

Physical address

Plot 8 Mabua Road, Kololo, Kampala- Uganda.

Visit website

https://judiciary.go.ug/data/smenu/19/Anti-Corruption%20Division.html

1 judgment

Advanced search

All years

All months

Filters

Sort by:

1 judgment

Citation	Judgment date
January 2015
Uganda v Kalumba 2 Ors (Criminal Case 8 of 2014) [2015] UGHCACD 1 (15 January 2015) Court convicted bank teller and manager of causing financial loss, and customer of theft and conspiracy to defraud. * Anti‑corruption – Causing financial loss (s.20(1) Anti‑Corruption Act 2009) – teller postings and manager authorisation leading to bank loss. * Theft – withdrawal of funds based on fictitious credits (ss.254(1), 261 Penal Code). * Conspiracy to defraud (s.309 Penal Code) – common intention inferred from actions; prior agreement not strictly necessary. * Evidence – admissibility of statements obtained after detention beyond 48 hours (art.23(4)(b)) – inadmissible. * Electronic evidence – weight of CCTV, transaction logs and internal audit; circumstantial proof may suffice even without forensic imaging if chain is complete.	15 January 2015

Citation

Judgment date

January 2015

Uganda v Kalumba 2 Ors (Criminal Case 8 of 2014) [2015] UGHCACD 1 (15 January 2015)

Court convicted bank teller and manager of causing financial loss, and customer of theft and conspiracy to defraud.

* Anti‑corruption – Causing financial loss (s.20(1) Anti‑Corruption Act 2009) – teller postings and manager authorisation leading to bank loss. * Theft – withdrawal of funds based on fictitious credits (ss.254(1), 261 Penal Code). * Conspiracy to defraud (s.309 Penal Code) – common intention inferred from actions; prior agreement not strictly necessary. * Evidence – admissibility of statements obtained after detention beyond 48 hours (art.23(4)(b)) – inadmissible. * Electronic evidence – weight of CCTV, transaction logs and internal audit; circumstantial proof may suffice even without forensic imaging if chain is complete.

15 January 2015