Know Thyself|Advocate of HighCourt| KBK Advocates|Partner@SternLega|HEAD-LEGAL ITK Holdings Ug |رذت بلله رب i love❤️islam the only way to live| Love my mum
A burning candle looses nothing when it lights another candle.
You don't need to know me to give me a glass of water when am thirsty.
Therefore let us think of helping our colleagues indeed we loose nothing if we do s
May the Almighty bless us
In Hon Muwanga Kivumbi Muhammad and 22 Others v Uganda, HCT-00-ICD-CM-0013-2026 (High Court of Uganda at Kampala, International Crimes Division, 9 July 2026), Honourable Lady Justice Susan Okalany reaffirmed that exceptional circumstances are not a prerequisite for discretionary bail. The principal question is whether the accused is likely to attend court and comply with the conditions imposed.
The Court granted bail to all 23 applicants, subject to the applicable bond, surety, reporting and travel conditions. It held that although the gravity of a terrorism charge and the stage of the investigations were relevant considerations, they could not, without concrete evidence of a genuine risk, justify continued detention. Bail must not be refused as punishment or merely because serious, untested allegations have been made.
Read the full Alert: https://t.co/ImLmDaNKx5
Read the full decision: https://t.co/ds5b2xt0by
.@ODPPUGANDA: RELEASE THIS YOUNG LAWYER. HE IS NOT A CRIMINAL. HE IS A VICTIM OF THE ENROLMENT CRISIS AT THE LAW COUNCIL!
“While the @JudiciaryUG strides boldly into the future with systems like #ECCMIS, the Law Council clings to the past, drowning in a sea of paper and manual inefficiency. No online portal exists, no digital tracking is offered-only delays and opacity. This analogue stubbornness is a deliberate choice, not a limitation, and it condemns aspiring advocates to unnecessary hardship while amplifying the enrolment crisis. The public deserves better.”— our #RadicalNewBar position on this matter in case a reminder where needed.
#ResisitLawlessness #ULSAt70
#BangTheTable #BackOnTrack #RNBVision2060
@Wassajja_Aiden@PoliceUg This is uncalled for, we need to respect the barr minimum of presumption of innocence
Canine evidence is never conclusive. Dogs re just animals
You can solely incriminate one on dog evidence. He remains a suspect
It is only unfortunate that a recusal application is heard by a person being asked to step aside😂
Anyway an Oath should be a defense for non recusal, it has been betrayed overtime.
UgandaVsMollyKatanga
Yesterday, Court turned into a legal brawl over a state witness’ perceived evasion. Come with me, I promise to explain.
If you don’t have much time to read, just watch the video on this and subsequent posts.
Background
The state led evidence of their 23rd witness in this trial before Lady Justice Rosette Comfort Kania. Her name is DSP Bibiana Akongo and she told Court that she was the Lead Investigator in this case. Her evidence-in-chief, led by Assistant DPP Samali Wakooli was presented the week before last and starting last week, the defense has had its turn to challenge it.
Their cross examination is led by a feisty, incisive @jet_tumwebaze.
Yesterday, the two sides came to ahead.
The defense has sought to portray this witness as inexperienced, lacking training and untruthful. They pointed to her lack of specific homicide training. She said police had stopped giving specialized training. Yesterday, they pointed to the evidence given by an earlier witness, the Director of Forensics in @PoliceUg to show that indeed, police still provides such training and has done so for years.
They then turned to her claim of having investigated more than 10 murders by shooting to the head. The Judge had sent her to her former practice stations to bring proof because these cases, according to the defense weren’t on any public record. She returned with a few papers with what looked like a summary of cases. She said she didn’t have authorization to share detailed cases.
But what really seemed to blow things over were two things.
1-The defense wanted to cross examine her on a blood pattern analysis report. You might recall that during the cross exam of the Director Forensics in police, Mr Andrew Mubiru, he had told court that the blood in the entire room belonged to Mrs Katanga, save for the one on the bed. This report goes into detail on how said blood could have got there. Mr Mubiru when asked how it could have got to the ceiling had casually said: she could have urinated there. This ticked off the defense.
Anyway, fast forward to yesterday, the prosecution objected to this witness being cross examined on such a technical report. A huge argument ensued with the defense accusing the prosecution of trying to hide behind technicalities to protect the witness and “hide evidence that doesn’t favor them” yet they disclosed it.
They said the court was the ultimate truth finder and that it should be allowed to go there. They said this witness had claimed expertise on a lot of areas (including “intelligence”) during her evidence-in-chief but now she’s protected from their questions.
There was an impasse.
Ultimately, Justice Kania ruled that the expert who wrote the report be presented to court as a court witness. Either side can then ask him whatever they please.
The defense said: “much obliged, my Lord, we’ve got even better than we’d hoped for”.
Then onto the mother of all fights! It stemmed from an expert medical report done in Jan 2024 at the behest of the @ODPPUGANDA which found that Mrs Katanga was then fit enough to make a statement.
The defense had taken umbrage at PW23’s claims that back in November, she’d gone to the ICU at IHK where Mrs Katanga was and found her seated and “not on life support like the rest of the ICU patients”.
The defense wanted to use this report to, in their words, “test the veracity of this witness”. Prosecution wanted none of that.
A legal fight ensued.
What seemed to perturb the defense even more was the fact that the witness had earlier denied knowledge of this report, despite it being addressed to her and despite confirming that the prosecution had got it from her before disclosing it to the defense. It was on her file that she said she fully controlled as the lead investigator.
Mr Tumwebaze asked her to read the first sentence of the report. Mr Muwaganya objected.
Mr Elison Karuhanga said: my Lord, this witness should not be protected from her file!
Chaos. (Video👇🏾)
@Markspecter1 But why do Ugandan Judicial officials find it hard to recuse
Yet it is a creature of statute
Do they feel that if they do so, they have failed to perform their duties oba they feel like a litigant can’t direct him/her to do something 😌
@joelonamugera The only zib i find with rotaract bunga!!!
They didn’t consult me about this member!!!😣😣
Oba mbagambe🤣
Naye kambaleke.
Any congratulations are in order