[ad_1]
KAMPALA, Uganda – The high-profile Katanga murder case has seen a major development as the court approved an application by the prosecution to amend charges against four accused despite objections from the defence team.
The trial, presided over by Judge Isaac Muwata of the Criminal Division of the High Court, entered its second day today (Wednesday, July 3, 2024).
One of the first matters to be decided was whether to add additional charges against Molly’s co-accused – Patricia Kakwanza, Martha Nkwanzi, Charles Otai and George Amanyire – after lengthy deliberations by defence and prosecution lawyers on Tuesday, the case was adjourned to today for the judge to decide.
In fact, the judge approved the prosecution’s application to amend the charges against the four defendants.
As a result, Patricia and Martha Nkwanzi face charges of destroying and tampering with evidence, and now of being accomplices to murder after the fact.
Likewise, Otay and George face one count of being accessories to murder and a second count of destroying and tampering with evidence.
The ruling paved the way for the trial to proceed, with Molly’s co-defendants pleading not guilty to the new charges.
The prosecution, led by Samalie Wakholi, has applied to amend the details of the charges and add new charges against the four suspects.
However, the defence team, led by Peter Kabatsi, opposed the change by citing Section 50(2) of the Indictment Trial Act.
The defense argued that the new charges were not disclosed as evidence at arraignment and that allowing them would be biased and unfair to the defendant.
They argued that the defendants were unprepared to defend themselves against the new charges and that the amendment would violate the provisions of the Military Intervention Act.
Kabasi said the attempt to amend the charge sheet was absurd and a disregard of directives causing injustice and prejudice.
In his ruling, the judge held that the court had the power to amend the indictment as required by the case.
He pointed out that the evidence had already been disclosed at trial and therefore, the defendant would not be prejudiced by the amendment.
He also said that if the defense needed more time to prepare, that would be taken into consideration during the trial.
The court therefore allowed the charges to be amended and all four defendants pleaded not guilty.
The court’s decision was criticized by the defense team, with lawyers for Molly Katanga and her co-accused arguing that allowing new charges against their clients violated the law.
Peter Kabasi said: “The court’s decision is a clear violation of our clients’ rights.”
The court also introduced three court assessors, Sharp Mutonyi, Okongo Simon and Consulate Tabu to assist in the trial.
The accused persons confirmed that although they did not know the Assessing Officer, they had no problem with the Assessing Officer’s handling of their case.
The jurors will listen to the evidence and provide the court with an opinion on whether to acquit or convict the defendant. However, their opinion is not binding on the court, which can make its own decision.
However, no sooner had the prosecution indicated that it was ready to proceed with the trial and that two witnesses were ready to testify, the defence team objected to the presence of Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Samalie Wakholi in the prosecution team, saying that she was only a potential witness, thus undermining the proceedings.
They said she could not be both a prosecutor and a witness at the same time as it violated several articles and various provisions of the law.
They prayed that the court order Chief Prosecutor Vakoli to recuse himself from the case and be ready to serve as a defence witness if necessary.
They argued that her presence violated
This argument caught the prosecution team off guard and they had to request a one-hour break for relevant consultation and preparation, which was granted.
When the court resumed, the prosecution debated vigorously but the defence team did its best to refute all arguments raised and remained calm about its position on the application.
Following rebuttals from the defence and prosecution, Judge Muwata adjourned the hearing to Tuesday, July 9, 2024 to rule on the case.
At the same time, for reasons of health, human rights and compassion, the court allowed Molly to appear in court via Zoom at subsequent hearings.
The prosecution had no objection to this matter, as they believed that the court should formally submit an application in accordance with the law to avoid procedural violations.
The prosecution requested two things: if Molly’s status as a prosecution witness required her to appear in person, then she should be able to do so; if she was required to defend herself, then she should appear in person for cross-examination.
About the author
[ad_2]
Source link
