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
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
3 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
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