City Businessman Hamis Kiggundu alias Ham has petitioned the Chief Justice of Uganda’s Judiciary Alfonse Owiny-Dollo to intervene in his scandal with Diamond Trust Bank after the Supreme court allegedly expressed bias in hearing and delivering the judgement.
Through his lawyers led by Fred Muwema and Arnold Kimara, Ham Enterprises officially wrote to the Chief Justice of Uganda over the bias and injustices and the supreme court, noting among others that:
- application remains in limbo with a possibility that its propriety will not be investigated and yet it can be rendered moot by the financial decision of the court, which is due any time.
- “Except for apparent bias, there is no reason why Ham is denied chance to be heard and possibly succeed on the appeal when his application for judgment on admission is considered
- It is now clear and so evident to every open and fair minded member of society that has been following this case that the court appears inclined to perform its cardinal duty of seating and hearing Ham’s application of Judgment on admission which is part of the Appeal.
- On the Contrary, Ham’s application, if successfully heard on the merits, would quickly expose Diamond Trust Bank’s admitted facts which need not otherwise be proved in accordance with S.58 of the Evidence Act
- It is the benefit of apparent bias in favor of Diamond Trust Bank which condoned their failure to file a cross appeal or notice affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal.
- Ham suspects that he is being told to wait for the final judgment so that the court can pronounce its findings on the new grounds which Diamond Trust Bank smuggled in the appeal via the proceedings of the 11th November 2021.
“My Lord Chief Justice, we have been instructed to write to the panel hearing the above appeal which you head to to communicate our clients’ apprehension of apparent bias which has been exhibited by court’s refusal to hear and determine the above application,” reads part of the petition.
what you need to know!
➔ It is now clear and so evident to every open and fair minded member of society that has been following this case that the court appears inclined to perform its cardinal duty of seating and hearing Ham’s application of Judgment on admission which is part of the Appeal.
➔ On the Contrary, Ham’s application, if successfully heard on the merits, would quickly expose Diamond Trust Bank’s admitted facts which need not otherwise be proved in accordance with S.58 of the Evidence Act
➔ It is the benefit of apparent bias in favor of Diamond Trust Bank which condoned their failure to file a cross appeal or notice affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal.”
Through its lawyer K&K advocates, Diamond Trust Bank admitted to committing illegalities on court records both in the High Court on Monday 31st August 2020 where the bank state that it did not have a license permitting it to operate in Uganda as required by Sections 4(1) and 117 of the Financial Institutions Act and in their November 2021 submissions at the Court of Appeal they emphasized that;
“The Court of Appeal justices erred at law when they failed to address the Substantial point of illegality upon which judgment was rightfully entered at the high court specifically stating that: “The learned Justices were entitled to first deal with the grounds regarding the procedure adopted by the trial Judge in striking out the defendants’ pleadings and granting the impugned orders before dealing with the other grounds.
In response to the illegality commited, Ham through his lawyers; Muwema and Co advocates applied for Judgement at the Supreme Court on the 23rd November 2021 on grounds that the justices at the Court of Appeals failed to address the substantial issue of illegality as rightfully entered at High Court, and against DTB’s admission to the same through their submission.
Ham further requested the supreme court applying for fixation of the date for hearing of their application for Judgment on the 26th November 2021.
The assistant registrar of the supreme court, Didas Muhumuza responded by writing an opinionated letter in which he openly expressed his view against hearing of the application instead of forwarding the Application for judgment to the court justices for the necessary action as his constitutional mandate requires stating that; “In my view, your instant application does not raise any new issue to necessitate any further / new fillings, which would any case require leave of court to do so” and adding that; “You are therefore, advised to wait for the final decision of court which will hopefully address our concerns”
Which opinion was later out of panic and mere desire to spread falsehood got circulated on different social media platforms as a court ruling, just to undermine Hams application that awaits judgment.
Ham and lawyers however noted that “Cognisant of the fact that applications to the court are not determined by views of the Registrars, we requested that our client’s application be forwarded to the Justices of the court for the necessary action,” they added that Such a stance does not foster the administration of Justice as it inevitably erodes Ham’s non-derogable right to be heard which is guaranteed by Article 28 of the Constitution.
How, where, and when should an ordinary Ugandan receive justice especially against powerful political players and internationals?
Do you have a story or an opinion to share? Email us on: [email protected] Or join the Daily Express WhatsApp channel for all the latest news and trends or join the Telegram Channel for the latest updates.
