Justice Bernard Namanya of the Civil Division of the High Court has allowed the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) Lino Anguzu to proceed with criminal proceedings against Superintendent of Police Avito Begira.
In 2025, Begira, a human resource officer attached to Wamala Region and resident of Lunya Zone, Makindye Ssabagabo in Wakiso district was charged with the offence of theft of construction materials valued at Shs16.6m at Makindye Chief Magistrates Court.
However, he challenged his criminal prosecution accusing DPP of being irrational, selective, discriminatory, procedurally improper, an unlawfully determining the ownership and possession of the land on top of abusing the legal process.
He was seeking a Court declaration stopping DPP from prosecuting him claiming that the land that resulted into the criminal trial is his. He added that he even challenged a one Kato Bumali who is also claiming its ownership in the civil courts
More Read
However, in his ruling, Justice Namanya dismissed his judicial review application on grounds that he failed to show that the DPP’s decision to prosecute him was tainted by illegality.
“Upon consideration of the material before Court, I am not satisfied that the burden has been discharged. The evidence relied upon by the applicant substantially goes to the competing claims over ownership and possession of the land, the authenticity of documents, the value to be attached to the forensic report, the circumstances under which the iron sheets were removed, and whether the applicant is criminally liable for theft,” the judge stated.
He explained that the matter of theft is properly triable before the criminal court noting that a civil court cannot stop the DPP from exercising his constitutional mandate by prosecuting a suspect who has the right to defend himself before court to be exonerated or convicted.
“This Court cannot, in judicial review, determine the applicant’s innocence, weigh the sufficiency of the prosecution evidence, resolve the land dispute, or substitute its view for that of the DPP on whether a prosecution should be undertaken,” the judge stated.
He added that a mere existence of a pending civil suit, and the applicant’s assertion that the dispute is civil in nature, do not by themselves render the prosecution unlawful or an abuse of process.
He insisted that in the absence of cogent proof that the DPP acted outside constitutional authority, ignored mandatory procedure, acted for an improper purpose, or reached a decision so irrational that no reasonable prosecutor could have reached it, the application cannot succeed.
“I therefore find no sufficient basis for this Court to stop the criminal proceedings in Katwe SD 20/10/02/23. The application is accordingly dismissed,” he ruled
