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
3 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
3 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 2015
Uganda v Gurindwa (HCT-00-AC-CM 5 of 2015) [2015] UGHCACD 2 (27 March 2015)
Where an accused, properly notified, voluntarily absconds, the court may close defence and proceed to judgment in absence.
Criminal procedure – trial in absence of accused – Article 28(5) Constitution – waiver by voluntary absence/abscondment – requirement of adequate service and opportunity for counsel – balance of accused’s fair trial rights and public interest; closure of defence and judgment in absence permitted where justified.
 27 March 2015
Uganda v Adakun (HCT-00-AC-SC 11 of 2014) [2015] UGHCACD 5 (9 March 2015)
Assistant manager convicted of embezzling UGX 540,796,510; system screenshots, audit and confession proved guilt.
Criminal law – Embezzlement and causing financial loss – Evidentiary weight of system-generated screenshots and internal audit – Corroboration of confession – Burden and standard of proof.
 9 March 2015
Uganda v Kisembo Moses & 3 Ors (Criminal Session 22 of 2014) [2015] UGHCACD 3 (3 March 2015)
Use of a SACCO under CDD guidelines was lawful; three officers acquitted, commercial officer convicted for embezzlement and abuse of office.
Criminal law — Corruption offences — Use of SACCOs as financial intermediaries under CDD guidelines; adequacy of MOU; burden to prove intent and knowledge for causing financial loss or neglect of duty; embezzlement and abuse of office proved where sole-signatory status obtained by forgery and funds unaccounted for; conflict of interest requires pre-existing personal interest.
 3 March 2015