What next after MPs Namujju, Mutembuli sent to High Court?

Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | MPs Cissy Namujju and Yusuf Mutembuli’s bail application flopped on Monday and they were instead sent by the Anti Corruption Court to the High Court for trial.

Chief  Magistrates Court declined to hear the bail applications for the members of Parliament who are facing charges of corruption arising from their alleged involvement in soliciting bribes to influence the passing of the Uganda Human Rights Commission budget.

The MPs who were first denied bail on Friday for lack of substantial sureties.

They are jointly charged with MP Paul Akamba who was granted bail at sh13 million but rearrested within court premises Friday.

Prosecution alleges that MPs  Mutembule, Akamba and Namujju on May 13th 2024 at Hotel Africana in Kampala Solicited from Mariam Wangadya the Chairperson of the Uganda Human Rights Commission an undue advantage of 20 percent  of  the anticipated Budget of the UHRC for the Financial Year 2024/2025.

This was reportedly done by asserting that the MPs were able to exert influence over the decision making of the Budget Committee of the Parliament of Uganda to increase UHRC budget, in consideration of the said undue advantage.

However, on Monday when the matter came up before Court Court presided over by the Chief Magistrate Joan Aciro, the Prosecution  amended the charges against them  and informed Court that investigations were complete.

As a result,  MPs Namujju and Mutembuli took plea afresh and denied the charges against them , and they are  also expected to make a fresh bail application after lengthy submissions before Court .

However, they were taken by surprise when the prosecution’s Chief State Attorney  Jonathan Muwaganya  told the Court that investigations are complete and prayed  to commit the accused persons to the High Court for trial.

In response, Namujju ‘s lawyer Kandeebe Ntabwirweki opposed the committal, saying that the Prosecution needs to first account for the whereabouts of MP Paul Akamba, since he is jointly charged with the two MPs in court. Kandeebe added that an accused person cannot be committed in his absence because this is procedurally wrong, and amounts to abuse of court process.

According to Kandeebe, Prosecution either had to first seek warrant of  arrest or to seek production warrant through courts directing commissioner General to present him

Otherwise, Kandeebe argued that they cannot commit an accused person whose whereabouts are unknown. He emphasized that the proceedings were adjourned for purposes of bail application but not for committal and also to fix a hearing date.

He thus asked Court to overrule the request to commit  her client  Namujju and Mutembuli , so as to first present Akamba or they first deal with the bail application for which the adjournment was made.

On his part, Akamba’s lawyer Richard  Rugambwa told the Court that his  client was abducted  by operatives he described  as goons. Court heard that Akamba’s constitutional rights have been violated  following his detention  for more than 48 hours without production in court, not allowed to be accessed by his lawyers, doctors and family members and they are therefore worried if he is still alive.

Rugambwa added  that Akamba is a member of Parliament,  Uganda Law Society and therefore the prosecution should be tasked with accounting for his whereabouts before the court proceeds to handle any other matter. He noted it’s an abuse of court process to present an amended charge sheet without the courtesy of telling the court where Akamba is.

However, Prosecution ‘s Muwaganya clarified to court that his submissions had been pre-emptied because he wants  only MPs Namujju and Mutembuli committed and therefore cannot commit someone who is absent.

Muwaganya told the Court that he expected all accused persons to be in court, including Akamba  to be committed. He said that he has just learnt today that Akamba was rearrested and he wants to verify that information, and believes that it will be easier for him to know where Akamba is since lawyer Rugambwa has some information.

According to Muwaganya, the rules provide for the committal of the accused persons in the absence of one of them . He said  the procedure is clear and doesn’t require notifying Court first, and therefore their application is not by way of ambush as the defense lawyers claimed.

Prosecution thus asked the Court to commit  Cissy Namujju and Mutembuli to the High Court for trial and   he could address Court regarding issues of Akamba afterwards.

In her ruling, the Chief Magistrate Aciro agreed with the MPs lawyers the purpose of today’s sitting was for bail application of Namujju and Mutembuli, and for prosecution  to be given a hearing date. Aciro  thus noted that she had considered Muwaganya’s submissions not to be  an application by the Prosecution but an information for her  court to act on.

She then went ahead to explain that Section  169 of the Magistrates Court Act gives the powers for the DPP to determine the offenses to be committed to the High Court. And that it’s  is within the jurisdiction of the DPP to decide which cases to send to the High Court.

Aciro rules that  no law bars the committal of the accused persons in the absence of their colleague and therefore ,  there will not be any procedural error in having Namujju and Mutembuli committed to the High Court without Akamba.

Consequently, she said the hearing of the bail application has been overtaken by events following the completion of investigations and request for committal.

Regarding Akamba’s whereabouts, the Court  ruled that no evidence to show whether he was rearrested in regards to this case or a new matter. She added  that  Akamba’s  lawyers know where to look for him from, but not through court.

She thus overruled this objection as well saying Namujju and Mutembuli will apply for bail in the High Court. After these proceeding, the Court then went ahead to read a summary of  an 11 paged evidence in which the DPP wants to rely on to ask court to convict Namujju , Akamba and Mutembuli on corruption charges.

In the summary of evidence, the Court has heard that in the year 2023, Mutembuli asked for the contact of the complainant Wangadya shortly after UHRC management members had appeared before Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee , where they had presented their Policy Statement and Budget  Framework .

That  afterwards, Wangadya interacted with Mutembuli the Vice Chairperson of the Legal Committee and they exchanged contacts before , she was later called that Mutembuli wanted to meet him so as to solve the financial problems of the commission.

That in their conversation, Mutembuli  insisted that he wanted 5 percent of the UHRC budget , but the accounting officer said it was not possible in the physical meeting that was held in Naguru. But Mutembuli said that it will not be possible for them  to pass the budget as well if the Commission doesn’t give them their percentage to exert influence on their budget.

Later, the Court heard that Wangadya reported the issues to the President who promised to act.

That later on May 13th 2024,  Mutembuli called Wangadya to meet him immediately at Hotel Africana, and she asked her  security to give her a recording device.

That she then  proceeded to Elgon Restaurant and met Mutembuli  who was with Akamba after turning on her record, and these explained to her that they were going to help her with her budget issues. Court has heard that they were waiting for Cissy Namujju to join them as they kept discussing budget issues.

The evidence before the court shows that  Mutembuli said Namujju was the crucial person they were waiting for . Further, that  Namujju then asked Wangadya how much money they were going to give them (MPs) and also asked how much they want for the budget, and Wangadya’s  secretary sent the documents on her WhatsApp.

That  after perusal of the documents that Namujju then told Wangadya  the amount they would want for its approval, and this was  20 percent of the Commission ‘s budget. However, evidence shows that Wangadya said she had not travelled with cash and then Namujju cautioned her to always move with cash during the budgeting period.

According to court records, MPs Namujju, Akamba and Mutembuli explained that the percentage was to facilitate officials at finance ministry, and also not to question the Commission’s budget when it comes to Parliament.

“That all the above discussions were captured on the recording device, which Ms Wangadya has placed on the table and after the meeting, she returned it to the security personnel, who had given it to her. It was the basis upon which investigations in their case were commenced,” reads the court documents.

That  during investigations, CCTV footage was extracted  by police from Hotel Africana confirming the meeting in issue. Evidence further states that when they were going for a meeting at Hotel Africana , Mutembuli arrived driving vehicle registration number UAQ 444A  vehicle and at around 2pm,  Akamba also  arrived and went to the same table with Mutembuli.

And that later at 16:31hrs , Namujju arrived at Hotel Africana with her vehicle registration number Hon NCD. The Court has heard that the police extracted their conversations through ‘Know your Customer’ and it was established that they were in one place.

That forensic analysis of Akamba’s phone, it  showed that Akamba had installed an app to interfere with his communication, shortly after he had been summoned to police. That he later went with a new mobile phone to the CID Headquarters for interrogation.

Further, that  Namujju also went with a different phone not the one she used on the fateful day. That the audios of their recorded  conversations were translated by an expert at Uganda Broadcasting Corporation -UBC.

According to the prosecution, during the trial, they will tender an application to retrieve CCTV footage, analytical report , police request for forensic examination of phones for imaging , those  of the MPs and those of Wangadya, Audio recordings, applications and court orders to extract the said information from the phones,  call data printouts for their phones and Wangadya’s consent, digital forensics of Wangadya phone, MP’s vehicles used to travel to Africana as evidence. The Prosecution concludes that  they will then ask Court to convict the accused MPs  because they have no defense whatsoever.

For now, the MPs have been remanded until when the High Court will handle their matters. Prosecution asked for criminal summons to be issued against Akamba.

Accordingly, the summons were issued requiring Akamba to be produced in Court on June 21st 2024. Proceedings took place in a fully packed court room with hundreds of voters and dozens of politicians watching. Security was also heightened in and outside the court premises, with the presence of both armed and non armed officers counterterrorism, and field Force Unit personnel of Police.

Trouble for the accused persons started last week after President of Uganda Yoweri Kaguta Museveni held the State of the Nation Address, where he disclosed that he has overwhelming evidence on the corrupt public officials.

Museveni said the MPs allegedly collude with accounting officers, Ministry of Finance and Bank of Uganda  to make allocations of Public resources in exchange for kickbacks (bribes) and promised to crush them.

The President revealed that the facts before him confirmed long standing rumours he had of corruption at the heart of government, especially during annual appropriation of taxpayer money .

He floated an idea of possible amnesty to the corrupt MPS but majority of the legislators interrupted his speech, demanding that he should act tough instead.

****

URN