The hearing of the murder case of the late businessman Henry Katanga at High court in Kampala on October 8, 2024. PHOTO/ABUBAKER LUBOWA
Justice Isaac Muwata, the presiding High Court judge in the high profile case in which five people are accused of being behind the murder of Kampala businessman Henry Katanga, yesterday directed the officers of the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to avail all the raw data on gadgets that the police seized from the deceased’s Mbuya home, including the CCTV footage and mobile phones.
The defence team had last week raised a query, demanding that all the evidence to be relied upon by the 10th witness, Assistant Inspector of Police Enoch Kanene, a forensics digital examiner in the Police Force, be disclosed to them for purposes of holding a fair trial for the accused since it’s a cardinal principal as per the Constitution. Our reporter Juliet Kigongo was in court and now brings you the excerpts.
At 10:19am, presiding judge Muwata walks into the courtroom. The court clerk calls for the murder file of Henry Katanga as the four suspects walk to the court dock.
Assistant DPP Samali Wakooli: My lord, for the prosecution, Wakooli Samali, Jonathan Muwaganya, and Anna Kiiza. On watching brief, my lord, we have Counsel Mwesigwa Rukutana, and Ivy Muhumuza. Representing the accused, we have Counsel Peter Kabatsi, Mr Elison Karuhanga, Jet Tumwebaze, and Miss Hanat Nabagala. All four accused are present in court, with A1, Molly Katanga, appearing via Zoom. Also, all the three assessors are in court. My lord, the matter is for ruling and we are ready to receive it.
Judge: I have noted the objections raised by the counsel for the accused persons in relation to the admissibility of the evidence of PW10 (prosecution witness 10, Mr Kanene) in as far as they allege that he does not comply with the areas of the law they cited and that there was not enough disclosure in the matter which has been persistent during this trial.
For the admissibility of evidence of PW10 are reserved, together, and shall be considered during the final analysis of the role of evidence in this matter.
His (Mr Kanene) evidence shall be taken on record, pending the final decision of the court. As for the disclosure, what was raised by the defence counsel should not be over emphasised because it’s the cardinal principal of the law that every accused person should be accorded a fair hearing and coming to the specific subject of disclosure, this must be strictly observed, see the case of ….cited in this case and Article 28 of the Constitution also cited.
I also find a case of ….instructive. The Court of Appeal of England had this to say, I will read what I noted there because it handles our problem here. The prosecution’s … at common law is to disclose to the defence all relevant material that is to say, evidence which is tended to either weaken the prosecution case or to strengthen the defence. It’s required that the police discloses to the prosecution all witness statements and the prosecution to supply copies of such witness statements to the defence to allow them inspect the statements and make copies unless there were good reasons for not doing so.
Furthermore, the prosecution were under a duty, which continued during the pre-trial period and throughout the trial to disclose to the defence all relevant scientific material whether to strengthen or weaken the prosecution case or assisted the defence case or whether the defence made a specific request for disclosure. Pursuant, to that duty, they were required to make avail the records with all or relevant and tests carried out by expert witnesses. Similarly in this case, the prosecution has a duty to disclose relevant scientific materials not withstanding their opinion to the contrary. I find that the raw data and video evidence be disclosed to the defence. I so order. So I order that the said be done.
Muwaganya: His (witness no 10) estimation is that he needs about six hours to do that extraction of the raw data from the gadgets so we can be in position to give the raw data by close of business today (yesterday) so that we are in the position to proceed tomorrow (today). The request my lord, we were advised that the storage required for uploading that data is about two telebytes, for each of them, so in total, we need the defence to avail him the gadget capable of accommodating four telebytes on which that data can be stored and given to them. So if we can have that my lord in the course of today, then by around 4 O’clock, we can be in position.
Judge: You are sure you will be able to disclose by close of today, supposing it’s not the case?
Kabatsi: My lord, first of all, the order of the court includes telephones, the DVD, and all the gadgets. The raw data will be extracted from the gadgets. It’s now coming to 11 am and if they need six hours, which will be towards the end of the office hours today (yesterday). We shall also need a day to look at the same.
Judge: Let’s come back on Thursday.
Muwaganya: My lord, for us, we are here to comply with every court order but it should be clear my lord because we are also tired of moving in circles. Now if I understood you very well, now the demand is that we present them with physical exhibits even before we present them in court.
Judge: My ruling is very clear, it says, raw data. So, we should adjourn to Tuesday next week or Thursday this week?
Kabatsi: Thursday my lord.
Jet Tumwebaze: Let the witness come with his academic certificates, because he claims he is an expert.
Court adjourns to tomorrow (Thursday, November 14).
Background
The prosecution accuses Molly Katanga of killing her husband, an act allegedly carried out with malice aforethought. Ms Katanga is charged alongside four other suspects, including her daughters, Patricia Kakwanza and Martha Nkwanzi.
According to the state, the incident took place on November 2, 2023, in Mbuya, Chwa 2, Nakawa Division, when Molly allegedly killed her husband during a fight in their bedroom. His body was later discovered by police on a small mattress. The State also contends that Nkwanzi and Kakwanza tampered with or destroyed potential evidence at the scene to prevent its use in judicial proceedings
