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

13 judgments

Advanced search

All years

All months

Filters

Sort by:

13 judgments

Citation	Judgment date
December 2022
Uganda v Musoke (Criminal Appeal 7 of 2022) [2022] UGHCACD 12 (20 December 2022)	20 December 2022
Akujjo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 2022) [2022] UGHCACD 10 (7 December 2022) Appellant’s embezzlement conviction and four‑year sentence upheld; evidence established misappropriation of UNEB fees and ten‑year public‑office ban. Criminal law – Embezzlement – UNEB registration and mock fees collected by headteacher – ownership of funds prior to remittance – access by virtue of office – evidential burden and corroboration – sentencing discretion – mandatory disqualification from public office under Anti‑Corruption law.	7 December 2022
Florence Nattu v Uganda(IGG) (Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2022) [2022] UGHCACD 9 (7 December 2022) The appellant’s convictions for causing financial loss and abuse of office were upheld based on payroll fraud evidence. * Criminal law – Appeal – appellate re-appraisal and scrutiny of evidence; burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Fraud/payroll fraud – creation of false entries and payments to ghost employees. * Abuse of office – role of a public officer and guilty knowledge causing financial loss. * Evidence – corroboration by witnesses and documentary correspondence.	7 December 2022
Owachgiu v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2021) [2022] UGHCACD 8 (7 December 2022) Late disclosure, misuse of police statement and contradictory figures made the embezzlement conviction unsafe, leading to acquittal. Criminal law – Embezzlement – requirement to prove specific amount beyond reasonable doubt; Disclosure – admission of late witnesses and documents; Right to fair hearing – equality of arms; Admissibility of police/plain statements – scope limited to tested matters; Appeal – re-appraisal of evidence and safety of conviction.	7 December 2022
Uganda v Agaba (Session Case 1 of 2021) [2022] UGHCACD 7 (2 December 2022) The accused convicted for abuse of office, causing financial loss and embezzlement arising from irregular payment requisitions. Criminal law – Abuse of office: requisitions and approvals; Causing financial loss – elements: act/omission, knowledge/reason to believe, causation and loss; Embezzlement – theft of employer funds, access by virtue of office and fraudulent intent; Evidentiary issues – signature comparison, WhatsApp extractions, KYC and bank records; Recoveries mitigate sentencing but do not negate loss.	2 December 2022
October 2022
Uganda v Onono (Criminal Case 88 of 2019) [2022] UGHCACD 11 (14 October 2022)	14 October 2022
September 2022
Asiimwe and Another v Attorney General and 2 Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2022) [2022] UGHCACD 6 (12 September 2022) Court found proven torture, quashed trial as nullity and awarded damages and costs against responsible state agencies. Human rights – Freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment – Non-derogable rights (Articles 24, 44) – Evidence of torture: affidavits, photographs, medical report – Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019: nullity of trial and acquittal (s.11(2)), compensation and punitive damages (s.9) – Military involvement in arrest and prolonged incommunicado detention.	12 September 2022
July 2022
Uganda v Robert Baryamwesiga and Fred Kiwankuka (Criminal Session Case 1 of 2020) [2022] UGHCACD 13 (15 July 2022)	15 July 2022
May 2022
Uganda v Kakonge and 2 Others (Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2021) [2022] UGHCACD 5 (25 May 2022) Acquittals upheld where prosecution lacked audits, supplier/official testimony and relied on investigator’s uncorroborated opinions. Criminal law – Embezzlement and causing financial loss – standard of proof; evidential necessity of employer testimony, audits and engineering/value-for-money reports; inadmissibility/limited weight of investigator’s opinion where independent technical evidence absent; conspiracy requires proof of agreement; suspicion and handwriting similarity insufficient for conviction.	25 May 2022
April 2022
Uganda v Kalemere and 2 Others (Criminal Case 7 of 2018) [2022] UGHCACD 4 (21 April 2022) Two accused convicted for using falsified customs documents; all three convicted for conspiracy to defraud tax. Customs law – falsified customs documents (entries) – s.203(h) EACCMA 2004; Penal law – conspiracy to commit felony – s.390 PCA Cap 120; Circumstantial evidence – ASYCUDA/IM4 records, container inspection, bank transfers, witness testimony; Knowledge and common intention; Bank account as conduit for proceeds.	21 April 2022
February 2022
SP No. 02340 Ogwok v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2021) [2022] UGHCACD 3 (28 February 2022) Appellate court reduced embezzlement conviction and sentence after proving only Ushs 1,820,000 was stolen. * Criminal law – Embezzlement – proof of loss – prosecution must prove amounts beyond reasonable doubt; handwriting expert evidence as proof of forgery. * Evidence – Burden of proof – presumption of innocence and accused's duty to explain matters within his knowledge (s105 Evidence Act) does not amount to shifting the burden. * Evidence – Self-incriminating statements – admissibility requires proof of voluntariness and circumstances; such statements may be used for signature comparison only if tendered for that purpose. * Sentencing – Discretion – must reflect proven loss and breach of trust; appellate court may reduce sentence and compensation if amount proved is lower.	28 February 2022
Uganda v Dr. Nassali and 3 Others (Criminal Session Case 06-CR-SC 17 of 2019) [2022] UGHCACD 2 (15 February 2022) Court found prima facie causing financial loss against accounting officer and contract manager; acquitted internal auditor and company director. Anti‑corruption — causing financial loss (s.20) — prima facie standard; abuse of office (s.11) — arbitrary act and prejudice to employer; lump‑sum contracts — scope, amendment and overpayment; theft and conspiracy — requirement of appropriation and meeting of minds; role of contract manager and internal auditor — mens rea and duties under procurement regulations.	15 February 2022
January 2022
Uganda v Asiimwe and 2 Others (Criminal Case 79 of 2019) [2022] UGHCACD 1 (14 January 2022) First accused convicted for unauthorized requisitions and misuse of funds; co-accused acquitted; conspiracy not proved. * Anti-corruption – Abuse of office – requisitioning public funds without mandate, lack of work plan or budget line – prejudice to employer. * Administrative finance – approval and processing of payments to personal accounts – not per se unlawful; reliance on technical verifications relevant. * Criminal law – Conspiracy to defraud – requires evidence of common agreement and mens rea; circumstantial evidence and hearsay insufficient. * Evidence – necessity to call key recipients/witnesses; risks in charging multiple office holders who may be valuable witnesses.	14 January 2022