State Attorney accused of bias in assault trial against Bunyaruguru County MP

Rubirizi, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | Rubirizi Resident State Attorney David Katungye has been accused of bias in a case in which a polling registrar sued Bunyaruguru County Member of Parliament John Twesigye Ntamuhira, for assault and causing bodily harm.

It is alleged that during the NRM party primaries held at Ryemondo village on September 4, 2020, Ntamuhira assaulted Amina Tushemerirwe for siding with his opponent.

But Tushemerirwe through her lawyer Jane Amooti of Orone & Co Advocates is now accusing Katungye of failing to cooperate with her as a state witness in the case. She explains that the State Attorney is not cognizant of the interests of the victim, and her witnesses in the trial that started on Thursday, a reason he has continuously ignored vital procedural observations.

She says in a letter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, that Katungye refused to apply for interim protection orders for the victim yet she addressed the court about numerous threats to her life by the accused person’s agents and some police officers.

According to Tushemerirwe, the State Attorney also refused to recognize the imaging technologist John Kisandi as one of the witnesses called to testify on the findings of the X-ray carried out on referral from Rugazi health centre IV following the issuance of Police Form III on September 7, 2020.

Tushemerirwe now wants the Director of Public Prosecutions to assign a neutral State Attorney to continue with the prosecution of the case before the Rubirizi Grade One Magistrate Christopher Tindyebwa, and allow the court to summon her witnesses that had been ignored by the court.

Katungye, the State Attorney told the court on Friday that while the investigating officer and the doctor who signed the police form had not turned up at court due to other engagements, he had received a letter addressed to his supervisors asking him to step aside in the interest of justice. He told the court he wasn’t in objection to the request and prayed for an adjournment

Enoch Kakuru, the counsel to the defendant objected to the adjournment of the case noting that Article 120, clause 6 of the 1995 Constitution of the Republic of Uganda protects the office of the DPP from being subjected to the authority or direction of any person.

He told the court that granting the letter way to the records of the court was an abuse of court process, justice, the office of the DPP and the constitution and raises questions on the motives the counsel watching brief.

The case was adjourned to March 10, 2022, to allow time for an administrative decision by the office of the Director of Public Prosecution.

*****

URN