Shs60 Billion Fraud Case: Finance Officials Face New Trial

The Anti-Corruption Court has scheduled October 12 for nine Ministry of Finance officials to enter a fresh plea regarding charges related to a Shs60 billion fraud case. This development indicates that the prosecution will move forward with the case, with the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) asserting that the available evidence does not clear the accused.

During a court session, defense lawyer Edward Rukutana questioned the prosecution’s delay in either withdrawing charges or complying with previous court orders for evidence disclosure. He expressed disappointment with the apparent procrastination, noting that the defense had anticipated the trial’s commencement after a July 13 deadline for disclosure, which has now passed.

Rukutana also referenced a public directive from President Museveni, suggesting that certain officials, including Accountant General Lawrence Semakula, should not stand trial and should instead be reinstated, with culprits being pursued. He implied that the ongoing delay suggested irregularities.

However, Chief State Attorney Richard Birivumbuka responded by stating that the President’s directive was not clear enough to influence their actions. DPP Lino Anguzu, when contacted, clarified that while the office is reviewing some aspects of the case, the current evidence does not exonerate the nine officials. He suggested that the President might have received incomplete information.

The accused officials are Jennifer Muhuruzi, Wilson Twinomugisha, Eric Mbabazi, Tony Yawe, Paul Lumala Nkalubo, Deborah Kusiima, Tacit Asahaba, Bettina Nagebare, and Mark Kasiiku. The case involves allegations of diverting over Shs59 billion intended for loan repayments to international bodies like the World Bank and African Development Bank. The funds were reportedly channeled to companies in Japan and the UK.

The matter came to light after the Bank of Uganda alerted investigators to suspected fraudulent transactions. The prosecution alleges various failures in control measures and active participation by the officials in altering payee details and manipulating financial reports, leading to the alleged diversion of funds. The allegations have not yet been proven in court.