Former Trade Ministry Permanent Secretary Geraldine Ssali and her co-accused will now have to defend themselves in court after the Constitutional Court struck down a provision of the Human Rights Enforcement Act that had been used to challenge criminal prosecutions over violations of non-derogable rights.
In a landmark ruling delivered on Monday, a panel of five judges declared Section 11(2) of the Human Rights Enforcement Act unconstitutional. The section had required courts to nullify criminal proceedings and acquit accused persons whenever their non-derogable rights were found to have been violated.
The judges are Oscar Kihika, Margaret Tibulya, Moses Kawumi Kazibwe, Asa Mugenyi and Musa Ssekaana.
The decision removes a key legal hurdle that had threatened to derail prosecution of Ssali, Igara East MP Michael Mawanda Muranga, Elgon County MP Ignatius Wamakuyu Mudiimi, lawyer Julius Taitankoko Kirya, principal cooperative officer Leonard Kavundira, and former Busiki County MP Paul Akamba over alleged mismanagement of Shs3.8 billion meant for Buyaka Growers Cooperative Society Limited.
The constitutional petition was filed by Faruku Muhamed and others, while the related constitutional reference arose from criminal proceedings involving Akamba. Akamba had challenged his prosecution, arguing he was tortured by security operatives during arrest and that the violation of his rights entitled him to an acquittal under Section 11(2).
The Constitutional Court ruled the provision was inconsistent with the Constitution because it allowed accused persons to be acquitted without a full trial. ‘The Constitution is unequivocal that an acquittal may only ensue upon the conclusion of a trial in which the court has received, scrutinised and evaluated the evidence,’ the judges held.
The court further found the provision unfairly denied victims of crime the opportunity to be heard and undermined accountability. ‘Any statutory provision that has the effect of denying victims of crime an opportunity to be heard, or that undermines their legitimate interests in the adjudicative process, must be scrutinized with the highest level of constitutional vigilance,’ the court stated.
The judges also rejected arguments that the right to a fair hearing belongs only to accused persons. ‘The right to a fair hearing is not confined solely to accused persons. Article 28(1) expressly guarantees a fair hearing to ‘a person’ and not merely to ‘an accused’,’ the court ruled.
For Ssali and her co-accused, the ruling means the Anti-Corruption Division of the High Court can proceed with hearing substantive corruption and money laundering charges that have been pending for months amid procedural delays.
Prosecution alleges Ssali abused her office during the 2021/2022 financial year by irregularly introducing Buyaka Growers Cooperative Society onto a list of entities eligible for government compensation for war losses despite the cooperative not appearing in the approved supplementary budget. She is also accused of authorizing payments totaling Shs3.8 billion to Kirya and Company Advocates in contravention of Treasury Instructions.
The state contends that between 2019 and 2023, the accused persons conspired to defraud government of more than Shs3.4 billion earmarked for compensating cooperatives affected during the 1981-1986 liberation war and subsequent insurgencies.
The trial has faced repeated interruptions, including adjournments caused by absent prosecutors and the pending Constitutional Court proceedings. Last week, Anti-Corruption Division Judge Jane Okuo Kajuga adjourned the case to June 29, 2026, after state prosecutors failed to appear because they were attending a national prosecution symposium.
With the Constitutional Court having resolved the legal challenge at the centre of Akamba’s defence, attention is expected to shift back to the Anti-Corruption Division, where prosecutors will seek to present evidence against Ssali and her co-accused in one of the country’s most closely watched corruption cases.