The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has called for prosecutorial accountability in the controversial case involving the acquittal of former State House staff, Joram Itungo, who had been accused of conspiring to murder foreign investor Carlos Patricio Cohen.
In a statement dated October 24, 2025, ULS said that while the allegations in the case were grave, the acquittal by the Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court was a lawful outcome based on the evidence before court.
ULS cautioned against treating the acquittal as a miscarriage of justice, saying it instead reflected the judicial system functioning as it should.
‘An acquittal after a full and fair trial is not a failure of justice, but its fulfillment,’ said Mr Anthony Asiimwe, Vice President of the Uganda Law Society.
The statement comes in the wake of President Museveni’s October 3 letter to Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo, in which he questioned how Itungo was granted bail and later acquitted.
The president requested the Chief Justice to review the case, sparking criticism from legal experts who described the letter as ‘unconstitutional interference in judicial independence.’
ULS’s latest statement appears to reinforce those concerns, focusing instead on the failures within the prosecution and investigation that led to the unsuccessful case.
According to ULS, a careful reading of the judgment in Criminal Case No 978 of 2024 showed that the prosecution failed to establish a core element of conspiracy the existence of an agreement between the alleged conspirators.
‘The alleged co-conspirator refused the alleged proposal and was never charged, confirming the absence of a meeting of the minds. Call-data records failed to establish any communication between the accused and the alleged accomplice,’ the statement reads in part.
In their statement ULS states that such shortcomings revealed fundamental flaws in the prosecution’s approach, calling the acquittal legally inevitable.
ULS further condemned what it described as a pattern of negligence and abuse within the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), accusing some officers of sanctioning fundamentally flawed and malicious cases without adequate oversight.
‘Public concern should therefore focus on the investigative and prosecutorial lapses that preceded the judgment. The President’s focus should be on addressing prosecutorial misconduct, rather than questioning the magistrate’s ruling,’ the statement emphasized.
To address systemic failures, ULS urged the government to launch an independent Commission of Inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act to investigate what it called ‘entrenched patterns of prosecutorial abuse and overreach.’
‘The ODPP and Uganda Police Force must conduct an internal review of the decision-making process that led to the prosecution of this case despite the absence of a core legal ingredient,’ the statement said.
ULS also warned government officials against issuing directives that could be construed as attempts to influence court outcomes, reiterating that the Constitution protects the Judiciary from external control.
‘The ODPP should strengthen its internal policy to ensure that criminal charges are only sanctioned when supported by sufficient, admissible, and credible evidence,’ Mr Asiimwe stated.
The Chief Magistrate Ronald Kayizzi of the Buganda Road Court acquitted Mr Itungo on August 18, 2025, after finding no evidence to prove the charge of conspiracy to murder Mr Cohen.
According to the judgment, the prosecution alleged that Mr Itungo conspired with a security guard, Abraham Eramu, to kill the Portuguese investor in exchange for a Shs36 million reward.
However, Magistrate Kayizzi ruled that there was no proof of an agreement between the two men, which is the essential ingredient in a conspiracy case.
‘The essence of criminal conspiracy is proof of agreement,’ the magistrate noted. ‘For the court to rule that there was an agreement in cases of conspiracy, the conspirators must have agreed to carry out an illegal act. The minds of the conspirators must have met.’
The court found that Mr Eramu had rejected the alleged proposal and that there was no communication between the two men.
‘The call data records exhibited by the prosecution show no single communication between the accused (Itungo) and Eramu Abraham on both of the accused’s numbers,’ the magistrate ruled.
On that basis, the court held that the prosecution had failed to establish the key elements of the offence, and acquitted Mr Itungo of all charges.