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 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

Citation

Judgment date

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