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
5 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
5 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
August 2019
Uganda v Nabunya (Criminal Session 2 of 2018) [2019] UGHCACD 4 (30 August 2019)
Employee convicted of embezzlement, 49 counts of forgery, and 49 counts of uttering forged deposit slips.
* Criminal law – Embezzlement – employee converting cash received in lieu of post‑dated cheques; audit evidence quantifying loss. * Forgery – bank deposit slips – handwriting expert evidence linking accused to forged slips; intent to defraud. * Uttering false documents – presentation of forged deposit slips to employer to conceal theft. * Ownership issue – payments written in owner’s name do not defeat company’s proprietary claim where company supplied goods. * Evidentiary sufficiency – audit and expert handwriting evidence can suffice absent CCTV or recovery of forged stamps.
 30 August 2019
July 2019
Uganda v Tumukunde & Anor (HCT–00–AC–CN 23 of 2018) [2019] UGHCACD 3 (31 July 2019)
Acquittal upheld because audit estimates, missing documents and contradictory evidence failed to prove criminality beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law — Embezzlement & causing financial loss — requirement of proof of actual loss and mens rea; Audit reports based on estimates and lacking primary documents insufficient for criminal conviction; Engineering inspections after environmental damage may produce only speculative findings; Weight of handwriting expert evidence depends on contextual challenge and corroboration; Procurement law — deviation from 'force on account' requires proof and relevant PPDA evidence.
 31 July 2019
January 2019
Uganda v Nalubega Mwanjuma & Anor (HCT-00-AC-CN 5 of 2018) [2019] UGHCACD 1 (25 January 2019)
Procurement outside PPDA rules amounted to abuse of office; falsified vouchers supported embezzlement conviction.
* Public Procurement – Non-compliance with PPDA and procurement regulations – procurement transparency, competition and value for money. * Criminal law – Abuse of office – senior public officers procuring outside statutory procedures. * Financial offences – Causing financial loss – requirement for contemporaneous valuation to quantify loss. * Embezzlement – falsified payment vouchers, disputed payee signatures, evidentiary weight of cash book and Auditor General report.
 25 January 2019
Uganda v Nalubega Sansa Mwajuma & Anor (Anti-corruption Case 5 of 2018) [2019] UGHCACD 2 (25 January 2019)
Appellate court convicts officers for abuse of office and treasurer for embezzlement; causing financial loss count unsustainable.
* Public procurement – failure to comply with PPDA and regulations – procurement without transparent bidding, valuation or evaluation committees constitutes abuse of office. * Abuse of office – senior public officers procuring assets outside statutory procedure – prejudice by exposure to overpayment and loss of value for money. * Causing financial loss – requires proper particularisation and valuation to quantify actual loss; absence of valuation may render the count unsustainable. * Embezzlement – forged or falsified payment vouchers and denial by purported payee can support conviction of treasurer who authored vouchers.
 25 January 2019
Uganda v Sundus Exchange & Money Transfer Limited & 8 Others (Miscellaneous Application 27 of 2018) [2019] UGHCACD 5 (18 January 2019)

 

 18 January 2019