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
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

Citation

Judgment date

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