Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court has set September 28th as the date to rule on the prosecution of Kyadondo East legislator Robert Ssentamu Kyagulanyi in regards to a case brought forth about inconsistencies in his age and credentials.
This case was earlier on transferred to the Director of Public Prosecutions(DPP) after their office requested to take on the case. Grade one Magistrate Stella Amabilis set the dates on Thursday after lawyer Hassan Male Mabirizi instituted the case against the youth legislator in his private capacity and state attorney Janat Kitimbo and Peter Mugisha from the DPP’s office entered their submissions.
Mabirizi alleges that on 11th July 2017 at the Parliamentary building, Mr. Kyagulanyi gave false information to Parliament regarding his date of birth. He further stated that the legislator also lied to the passport office that he was born on 12th February 1982 which was contrary to the date reflected on his academic transcripts.
“Due to the lengthy submissions made by the parties in this matter, this court will give it’s ruling on September 28,” Amabilis ruled.
While giving his submission, Mabirizi argued that the Constitution does not give the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) absolute powers to take over private prosecutions.
“Article 120 of the Constitution only gives the DPP functions but not absolute powers to takeover privately instituted criminal cases. DPP has to prove that the takeover is regarding the public interest the interest of the administration of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process, which it has not demonstrated,” Mabirizi submitted.
In response to Mr. Mabirizi, both Kitimbo and Mugisha asked the Magistrate to make an order for their formal takeover of the case. They argued that the DPP has absolute powers to take over private prosecution under Article 120(3)(c) and section 43(1)(c) of the Magistrate Court Act.
Mabirizi further asked the court to summon Mr. Kyagulanyi to physically appear in court noting that proceeding with the matter in his absence defies Article 44 of the Constitution which states the right to a fair hearing is non-derogable.
