DPP should explain withdrawing criminal charges against suspects

Withdrawing murder charges against former Kampala Central Police commander Aaron Baguma by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) without clear explanation to the public has cast a cloud of doubt to the institution in as far as prosecution of criminal matters and dispensation of criminal justice is concerned.
Article 120 of the 1995 Constitution of Uganda as amended establishes the office of the DPP and under clause (3) of the same, spells out functions, specifically under the same provision, clause (3) (d) mandates the DPP to discontinue criminal proceedings instituted by himself/herself or any other person or authority at any stage before judgment is delivered except that he or she shall not discontinue any proceedings commenced by another person or authority except with the consent of court.
It should be noted that the function of discontinuing criminal proceedings is exclusively exercised by him by virtue of Article 120 (4) (b) of the Constitution. While exercising his powers, in this case withdrawing criminal charges, he should have considered the interest of the public matter, interest of the administration of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process as provided for under Article 120 (5) of the constitution.
The framers of the constitution provided some kind of immunity or protection to the DPP in the sense that while exercising these functions, he/she is not subjected to any control or direction of any person or authority, thus whatever decision he makes, no one can question not even a court of law as per provisions of Article 120 (6) of the 1995 Constitution.
The danger of this kind of practice is that the public cannot have his actions questioned, like the current scenario where the aggrieved family and those who have interest in the matter because his response will be that he exercised his actions as mandated by the law.
The best practice in my view would be for the DPP to explain to the public why he opted to withdraw the charges with regard to answering the key issues i.e. public interest, the interest in administration of justice such that we as the public don’t interpret his actions as abuse of legal process.
If such discretionary powers are not checked by any authority then chances are high that the legal process in dispensation of justice in criminal matters is going to continue to be abused.
Brian Kisomose,
0702370920 /0753456115