Development bank boss acquitted

KAMPALA

“ I find her not guilty, I acquit her accordingly…” This is the verdict the Anti Corruption Court pronounced yesterday while acquitting Ms Patricia Ojangole, the chief executive officer of Uganda Development Bank Ltd (UDBL) who has been facing charges of conflict of interest for the past few months.

The IGG had accused Ms Ojangole, 36, of influencing the recruitment process that eventually culminated in getting the bank’s top job while she was in acting capacity in 2012. While acquitting Ms Ojangole, presiding judge Lawrence Gidudu noted that the prosecution (IGG) failed to prove the charges against her beyond reasonable doubt and that the evidence brought instead supported her on the contrary, hence her acquittal.

The judge said he had never come across a case where the prosecution evidence adduced, supports the accused. The judge noted that there was no interest that Ms Ojangole would have disclosed to the bank’s board since it was the board that encouraged her and other staff to apply for the existing jobs in the bank after the old management had been fired over mismanagement.

The accusations
The prosecution had accused Ms Ojangole of participating in various processes and proceedings that culminated in her appointment to the position of CEO of the bank on November 30, 2012, when she signed the employment contract but failed to disclose the nature of this interest to the board. Mr Sydney Asubo who represented the IGG unsuccessfully argued that Ms Ojangole should have written to the board to disclose her interest and that disclosure was mandatory.

However, in his verdict, the judge said both the accused (Ms Ojangole) and the board knew that there were vacant positions in UDBL that were to be filled through an open competition and that the staff of UDBL including the accused (Ms Ojangole) were going to apply, hence she did not have to inform them as suggested by the IGG.

The judge explained in his judgment that the charge of conflict of interest would have been sustained against Ms Ojangole if the board was not aware that she had applied and she ended up gaining from her secrecy, which was not the case.

“The board denied being influenced by the accused (Ms Ojangole) and the police officer who investigated the matter chose to ignore those denials by the board and instead brought these charges against her for which I find no proof.” ruled justice Gidudu, adding: “I believe the accused’s version that the charges were malicious because as the internal auditor, she unearthed a lot of rot which led to the dismissal of the entire management and appointment of a new one. UDBL according to the accused had 60 per cent of loans as none performing, meaning that management was not diligently performing or it was colluding with the borrowers to fleece the bank.”

Pw6 (investigating police officer) chose to prefer charges against the person who had pointed out the wrongs in UDBL in her audit reports. The accused should have been commended by a serious investigator but not bringing her into the dock leaving the crooks at large.

But shortly after the judgment, the IGG through Mr Asubo, said she was dissatisfied with the entire judgment and that they were going to appeal against it in the Court of Appeal by close of business yesterday.

[email protected]