Breaking

Court Asks for Written Submissions in Basajjabalaba Compensation Case

Legal Brains Trust challenged the procedure leading to the compensation citing that it was fraudulent and demanded that Basajjabalaba and 19 other respondents should refund the money in question.
13 Jun 2019 18:12
Parties in the Basajjabalaba Compesation Case. File Photo
A panel of five Constitutional Court Judges has asked parties in the case challenging the compensation of 142 billion shillings to businessman Hassan Basajjabalaba to file written submissions.

They judges Kenneth Kakuru, Hellen Obura, Geoffrey Kiryabwire, Steven Musota and Cheborion Barishaki told the petitioner Legal Brains Trust through their lawyer Isaac Ssemakadde to make his submissions seven days from and then serve the 20 respondents in the matter.

The respondents will then make a reply by June 27th, 2019 and then the judgment will be on notice.

Other respondents are; Basajjabalaba’s company Haba Group Limited, Victoria International, Trading Company, First Merchant International, Yudaya Uganda, Sheila Investments Limited, Bank of Uganda, Former Minister for Finance Sydah Bumba, Professor Khiddu Makubuya the then Attorney General,   the defunct Kampala City Council, former Kampala town clerks Gordon Mwesigye James Ssegane, Ruth Kijjambu, her deputy William Tumwine, and four banks which paid out the money in question. They are United Bank of Africa, Orient Bank, Bank of Baroda and Tropical Bank.  

The case arises from 142 billion shillings compensation given to Basajjabalaba in 2011 on orders of President Yoweri Museveni. This was after Basajjabalaba demanded to be compensated for cancellation of contracts of city markets and the Constitutional Square.

Legal Brains Trust challenged the procedure leading to the compensation citing that it was fraudulent and demanded that Basajjabalaba and 19 other respondents should refund the money in question. 

The petitioner argued that the respondents conspired to commit corruption since the transactions were erroneously made. 

In their brief defence before court, the respondents say that the case should be dismissed because it is incompetent before the Constitutional court. 

Lawyer David Mpanga who represents Tropical Bank contends that there is nothing constitutional to be interpreted by the constitutional court since the petitioner says that there was conspiracy. 

 Mpanga says the petition should be dismissed because it was lengthy with 41 pages yet it is supposed to be simple not more than eight pages.

Lawyer  Caleb Alaka who represents Basajjabalaba and his companies also told court to look at the facts of this case well arguing that the compensation was sanctioned by both parliament and the then Finance Minister.

Alaka said that the opinion of the current Attorney General who agrees with the petitioners and disagrees with his predecessors is political and it’s not binding.  

The other respondents adopted the submissions of lawyer Alaka. 

Images 1

Keywords