Is DPP Chibita abusing his office powers?

Kampala. After more than 25 court appearances and the Chief Magistrate ruling that the accused had a case to answer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Mike Chibita, withdrew a case in which a top government official and two others faced charges related to illegal possession of Ugandan passports.

Mr George Wirefred Opiro, an assistant commissioner in the ministry of Education, had been charged jointly with Claudine Charla aka Claudine Atim and Ben Balo aka Benedict Ocana in a case hinged on the management of the estate of the late Jackson Ocana, a former ambassador.
Mr Opiro, brother of the late Ocana, was facing accusation of conspiring with the two “foreign nationals” to fraudulently gain from Ocana’s estate.

At the time of the decision in 2014, prosecution led by Mr Jonathan Muwaganya had presented its case and all prosecution witnesses had testified in favour of the State with the presiding Chief Magistrate ruling that all three accused persons had a case to answer on all the charges.

Cases withdrawn
A complainant, who had appeared as a witness in the court, protested the DPP’s decision, but Mr Chibita maintained that he was not under duty to explain his decision.
Last week, in a space of four days, DPP Chibita withdrew charges against two high profile suspects in cases that had been widely discussed by members of the public.
On January 9, it emerged that the DPP had closed the case of sexual assault and that of physical assault against the Aya Group chairman, Mr Mohammed Hamid Mohammed, due to reported lack of sufficient evidence to support the charges.

Mr Hamid had been accused of sexually abusing his former employee, Jamila Opondo, and assaulting her at his Pearl of Africa Hotel in Kampala about a year earlier.
The case had drawn public attention and even caused the suspension of State minister for Labour Herbert Kabafunzaki, who is on trial for allegedly soliciting and receiving a Shs5m bribe from Mr Hamid in exchange for “clearing” his name in the media of the alleged claims of sexual abuse.

It took strong demands from the public for charges to be preferred against Mr Hamid.
As the news of Mr Hamid’s clearing was settling in, two days later it emerged that the DPP had dropped charges against former Kampala Central Police Station boss, Mr Aaron Baguma, in connection with a murder at Pine Car Bond in Kampala.

The decision followed months of back and forth, including Mr Baguma’s murder file ‘disappearing’ at some point. Mr Baguma had been jointly charged with the Pine Car Bond proprietor, Muhammad Ssebuufu, Philip Mirambe, Stephen Lwanga and Paul Tasingika for the murder of businesswoman Donah Katusabe.
We sought an explanation from Mr Chibita who declined to speak to us.

“Yesterday [January 10] you decided to write the story without my comment. I think we should leave it at that. I am not ready to comment,” Mr Chibita said.
However, in an interview with the New Vision, Mr Chibita was quoted as saying that “there is no legal requirement for the DPP to give reasons why a certain case has been withdrawn. I withdraw 10 cases from court on a daily basis.”

Are DPP’s powers abused?
Mr Chibita was appointed DPP in 2013, replacing now Supreme Court Justice Richard Buteera, who had himself come under attack over sanctioning charges which critics said were politically motivated.
The most prominent case cited in this regard during Justice Buteera’s time was the rape case brought against Dr Kizza Besigye in 2005.
The current DPP has either sanctioned but failed to prosecute several high profile cases, or has simply withdrawn some from court because the “State lost interest” at some time and “for lack of sufficient evidence”.

One such cases is the treason case brought against Dr Besigye mid-2016 which has been mentioned in court many times but the prosecution says it is still investigating.
Dr Besigye has since refused to return to court over the matter, just like he and his co-accused, including Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago have refused to return to Kabale Chief Magistrate’s Court where they are facing charges of inciting violence for the last five years without a conclusion to the case.

“I consider this to be an abuse of the legal process and violation of my constitutional rights. We are in the process of moving the Constitutional Court to intervene and stop the abuse. I consider that continuing to offer myself to the abuse, is abating the injustice,” Dr Besigye said in regard to his refusal to return to court.

In public interest?
Last year, the Network for Public Interest Lawyers (NETPIL) criticised Mr Chibita for what they said was failure to use his constitutional mandate to bring the perpetrators of torture acts to book.
“The office of the DPP has failed when it comes to acts of police brutality. It is baffling that the DPP consciously receives suspects who are in a deplorable state and without flinching leads them to the dock for mention of their case to take plea without questioning the cause,” the organisations said in a statement.

Masaka District chairman Jude Mbabali was one of the Catholic lawyers who sued Fr Jacinto Kibuuka, the new Bishop of the Antiochian Eastern Orthodox Church, for what they said was abusing Catholic Church leaders.
Using his powers, the DPP took over the matter and shortly lost interest in the matter. The Catholic lawyers called the move “absurd”.

Speaking about DPP Chibita, Mr Mbabaali said: “It is evident that he discontinues cases in the interest of government and on his behalf. I think there should be an investigation why he is doing this; he is abusing his office, acting ultra vires, and many people are going to suffer.”
Mr Mbabaali says the Constitution should be amended to reduce the powers of the DPP.

But even under the current arrangement, Mr Nicholas Opiyo, a lawyer, argues, the DPP is required to use his powers to the benefit of the citizens.
“It is not enough to say that he has powers but they must be exercised judiciously and in public interest,” Mr Opiyo says. “DPP powers are not absolute and the courts must have the guts to look into them.”

Does DPP have excessive powers

The DPP is appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Public Service Commission. The office can institute criminal proceedings against any person or authority in any court with competent jurisdiction except the court martial.

The DPP also has powers to take over criminal prosecutions instituted by any other party, and can at any stage before a court decision is made withdraw charges against anyone.
The only exception is that if the DPP wishes to withdraw a case that it has taken over from a private prosecutor, it can only do so with the consent of court.
In the exercise of its duties, the DPP is not subject to the direction or control of any authority or individual.

[email protected]