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
July 2018
Ssenyonjo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 7 of 2018) [2018] UGHCACD 7 (27 July 2018) Appellant’s convictions for soliciting, receiving a gratification and abuse of office upheld; inability to perform the act not a defence. Anti‑Corruption – solicitation and receipt of gratification (s.2(a) ACA 2009) – telephone records, trap operations and marked notes as sufficient evidence. Impossibility of performing promised act – not a defence to solicitation/receipt if officer corruptly demands or accepts money. Abuse of office – exploiting official position and failing to advise Land Board. Procedural shortcomings in arrest or contradictions – do not necessarily vitiate otherwise cogent evidence.	27 July 2018

Citation

Judgment date

July 2018

Ssenyonjo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 7 of 2018) [2018] UGHCACD 7 (27 July 2018)

Appellant’s convictions for soliciting, receiving a gratification and abuse of office upheld; inability to perform the act not a defence.

Anti‑Corruption – solicitation and receipt of gratification (s.2(a) ACA 2009) – telephone records, trap operations and marked notes as sufficient evidence. Impossibility of performing promised act – not a defence to solicitation/receipt if officer corruptly demands or accepts money. Abuse of office – exploiting official position and failing to advise Land Board. Procedural shortcomings in arrest or contradictions – do not necessarily vitiate otherwise cogent evidence.

27 July 2018