Court

AG Nyombi Dragged To East Africa Court Over Sh50 Bn

Attorney General Peter Nyombi

The East African Court of Justice has resumed hearing a case where the Uganda’s Attorney General Peter Nyombi is implicated in a Sh 50 billion scandal.

The case filed by a Ugandan citizen Mr. Godfrey Magezi is being heard by the Court’s First Instance Division in Arusha Tanzania.

Mr Nyombi is being implicated in alleged acts of corruption, abuse of office,  misappropriation,  illicit enrichment, plunder and wastage of government resources, contrary to the principles of good governance, transparency, accountability, social justice and equal opportunities.

Header advertisement

Mr Magezi rushed to the regional court following a deal where government paid $17.8 million to a local pharmaceutical company Quality Chemicals Ltd for HIV/AIDS drugs; an amount he believes was inflated.

Magezi says he immediately reported the matter to the Inspector General of Government [IGG], who investigated the matter and established that deal caused a loss to government.

The inspectorate made recommendations and preferred charges against the perpetrators, but the Attorney General refused to take any action.

Magezi through his lawyer Mohammed Mbabazi says that Attorney General has in various correspondences shown contempt of the IGG’s findings and report as unfounded and of no legal effect.

The Applicant holds that the Attorney General’s actions  breach and infringe the principles of law, good governance, accountability and democracy and are inconsistent with Articles 6 (c) and (d), 7(2) and 8(1) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.

Magezi wants the court to compel government to recover the money and to bring the culprits to book, as had earlier ordered the IGG.

Nyombi’s lawyers George Kalemera however, told court that the Attorney General had acted within the powers vested in him by the constitution and that the applicant had not adduced any evidence to Court to prove the commission of any unlawful acts or decisions by the respondent which infringes the provisions of the Treaty.

The Court will deliver its Judgment on notice.

 

Comments

Header advertisement
To Top