By THE INDEPENDENT UG
Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | The Anti-Corruption Court has granted approval for the prosecution of Mary Gorreti Kitutu Kimono, the Minister of Karamoja Affairs, on allegations of mismanaging sh1.5 billion intended for peace-building activities. In a ruling delivered by Lady Justice Jane Okuo Kajuga, the court determined this case to be separate from the one involving accusations related to iron sheets against Kitutu, finding no connection between the two.
Kitutu, along with Geoffrey Sseremba, Deogratius Masagazi, and Tracy Atuhirwe, all from the Office of the Prime Minister, faces charges of neglecting various peace-building initiatives in the Karamoja sub-region between February and June 2022, resulting in financial losses amounting to sh1,555,365,000 for the government.
Kitutu’s legal team challenged the criminal summons, claiming a violation of her right to a fair trial, arguing that prior charges related to the mismanagement of supplementary funds, including the iron sheets case, already subjected her to legal scrutiny. The Inspectorate of Government defended the distinct nature of the charges, emphasizing their relevance to addressing grievances in Karamoja.
Lady Justice Kajuga sided with the Inspectorate of Government and the Attorney General, stating that the cases were unrelated. She highlighted the lack of evidence linking the alleged offenses and individuals involved in both cases. Kajuga emphasized that the charges in the current case focused on the mismanagement of funds designated for peace-building activities, distinct from the previous case related to iron sheets.
While Kitutu’s legal team expressed dissatisfaction with the ruling, citing concerns about the fairness of the investigative process, Lady Justice Kajuga found no grounds suggesting prejudice to Kitutu’s defense or infringement of her rights in the issuance of charges and non-appearance.
The ruling clarified that initiating investigations into distinct allegations did not offend the right to a fair trial, emphasizing the lack of evidence indicating that the offenses were part of one whole transaction. Kitutu’s legal team cited the Constitutional Court’s decision in Kazinda vs AG, emphasizing their dissatisfaction with the court’s interpretation of the right to a fair trial in this context.
URN
Discussion about this post