Katanga trial: Key updates as witnesses stumble during cross-examination

Evidence serves as the foundation for determining guilt or innocence in criminal cases. Mishandling vital evidence can lead to wrongful convictions or acquittals based on incomplete or tainted information. 

Uganda faces significant challenges in managing cases and evidence effectively, particularly within its law enforcement agencies. The importance of proper evidence handling in law enforcement cannot be overstated, as it forms the cornerstone of fair and effective criminal justice systems worldwide.

This analysis examines the systemic issues and omissions that emerged during the cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, highlighting the poor handling of evidence by investigating officers.

The case of Uganda vs. Molly Katanga and four others serves as a glaring example of these issues. During the trial, it was revealed that police officers, who were key witnesses, failed to record crucial observations from the crime scene in their official statements. This omission became evident during cross-examination when witnesses could not support their testimonies, exposing significant gaps in capturing vital information.

For instance, the defense argued that these omissions suggested the officers’ testimonies were fabricated to fill in gaps, as these details were not documented in their official statements. One police officer, who was the first responder to the crime scene and had over 31 years of experience, admitted under cross-examination that he was aware of proper procedures for first responders.

However, he also acknowledged that he had never received the necessary training for these procedures. The systemic issues in evidence handling were further highlighted by the Uganda police’s own actions. According to a 2020 report published by Daily Monitor, the police have filed over 4,500 cases against their own officers over two years concerning the mishandling or mismanagement of criminal case files. While this effort to curb the vice is commendable, the persistent obstacle of judicial backlog in the courts has hindered significant action.

Kampala is currently gripped by a high-profile trial of Molly Katanga and four others that has been making headlines for weeks. The case, which was recently adjourned to August 20, has captivated public attention due to its complexity and the serious charges involved. The case involves the alleged murder of Henry Katanga, a prominent businessman.

Molly Katanga, his wife, has been charged with murder, while their daughters, Patricia Kankwanzi and Martha Nkwanzi, face charges of allegedly destroying evidence. The family’s shamba boy, George Amanyire, and medic, Charles Otai, have also been charged as accessories after the fact.

The lead prosecutor, Samali Wakooli, faced an early challenge from the defense lawyers, who demanded that she recuse herself from the trial due to her heavy involvement in collecting key evidence. This initial confrontation set the tone for a contentious trial. Since the trial began on July 9, 2024, it has been marked by dramatic twists and turns, with witnesses contradicting one another and evidence being called into question, making it difficult for the prosecution to build a solid case.

On Monday, July 15, Justice Isaac Muwata, who is presiding over the case, adjourned the trial for a month, much to the consternation of the defense team. The defense argued that their client, Molly Katanga, has been in jail for almost a year.

They were particularly frustrated because the same judge had previously denied her bail, stating that since the prosecution was ready with evidence, she would be given a chance to prove her innocence rather quickly. This adjournment, therefore, felt like a significant setback for the defense.

Witnesses’ performance exposes prosecution

The testimony of witnesses prepared by the prosecution and police has shed light on the tragic events of November 2, 2023. The family’s reputation was shattered when Henry Katanga was found dead in his home, with initial evidence suggesting suicide. On the day of the lengthy adjournment, Ms. Naome Nyangweso, the sister of the late Henry Katanga and a key witness for the prosecution, unexpectedly claimed she could not speak English in court, despite having written and signed three statements in English.

Nyangweso’s sudden language barrier led to the trial being adjourned until August 20, as the court scrambled to find an interpreter fluent in Runyankole, her native language.

Defence lawyers poke holes into lawyer’s testimony

Last Monday, the credentials of Ronald Mugabe Ruranga were called into question during cross-examination, as he was unable to produce any documents to support his claims of being a licensed lawyer.

Ruranga, a 45-year-old lawyer, businessman and farmer, was the only witness cross-examined. He has been practicing with Agaba and Company Advocates for over 17 years and served as a legal advocate to the late Katanga. During the cross-examination, he told the court that he had received documents from Katanga related to the making of a will, including original documents of ownership and land titles. He mentioned that he was closely related to Katanga as a family friend and was often invited to family functions.

However, the defense presented a document from the Chief Registrar stating that Ruranga is not listed on any advocate logs. They argued that if he is practicing, it is illegal, as there are no records of him as an advocate. Additionally, the defense presented a folder of documents showing business transactions by the late Katanga, highlighting the absence of Ruranga’s participation in these documents as proof that he was not as acquainted with the deceased as he claimed.

In response, Ruranga explained that his practicing certificate is under the name Ronald Mugabe and that he has documents in his office that can demonstrate his work with the late Katanga. This concluded the cross-examination.

Phone technician says he doesn’t know any of the accused

To compound the prosecution’s misery, another witness confirmed under cross-examination that he didn’t know any of the accused. On Friday, July 27, phone technician Pierre Kajura testified that he only knew the late Henry Katanga and had helped him set passwords on his phone.

Led by prosecution counsel Anna Kizza, Kajura revealed that he met Katanga in 2017 and had a business relationship with him. The defense team, finding his testimony unconnected to the case, decided not to cross-examine him.

Police doctor disowns evidence:

On July 9, 2024, the prosecution called its first witness, Dr Julius Muhwezi, a police officer attached to the Police Directorate of Health Services in Nsambya. Dr Muhwezi distanced himself from a police form presented as evidence. He told the court that the form had been tampered with and did not reflect his true findings.

“I can only own part B of the form. I didn’t sign the first half,” Dr Muhwezi stated, claiming that his signature and stamp on the second half had been altered. “Where I signed was changed. What appears like 13th is not mine.”

The defense asked the witness to confirm the form’s adulteration, to which he responded, “Because, my lord, what should have been the [November] 12th reads [November] 13th.” He confirmed that the stamp on the [November] 12th [Police Form 24] belongs to him, but the one on the 13th was not stamped by him. He reiterated that he examined the suspects as required.

The defense counsel, Elison Karuhanga, suggested that Dr Muhwezi did not examine the suspects and that the form was fabricated as evidence. Dr Muhwezi denied this, stating, “I took an oath, I examined these people. But the signature and stamp that appear on the form are not mine.”

Another police officer changes statements in court

Another prosecution witness, Peter Ogwang, a police officer attached to Bugolobi police station, testified that he had been called to the scene of the crime and had found a pistol and other evidence. Ogwang stated that he received a phone call from Dr Otai, informing him of a suicide by shooting at the scene.

He also mentioned that Patricia, who was present at the scene, wanted him to report the incident as an accident. However, during cross-examination by defense lawyer Kabega, Ogwang contradicted his earlier statement. Asked to confirm that Patricia had asked him to report the matter as an accident. he confirmed this, but the defense requested to see the official statement he made.

When the statement was shown, it contained no record of Patricia asking Ogwang to report the incident as an accident or of the officer seeing Martha. The defense argued that the officer was lying, as his statements did not align with what he had told the court.

The prosecution then asked the witness if he had recorded everything, he observed that day. He admitted he had not, explaining, “I might have forgotten, but everything I said is true.”

Katanga’s nephew put to task over discrepancies in testimony:

On July 10, 2024, the prosecution called Timothy Nyangweso, a presenter at Uganda Broadcasting Corporation (UBC) and a church minister at Watoto Church, to testify.

Nyangweso claimed that on November 2, 2023, he had called Martha, Katanga’s daughter, and that she had informed him of her father’s death. However, during cross-examination, the defense counsel presented a call data list that showed no record of Nyangweso’s alleged call to Martha, casting doubt on the credibility of his testimony.