Court Refuses to Remove Convicted URA Advisor

(Nakasero) – The anti-corruption court in Nakasero has dismissed an application by city lawyer Hassan Male Mabirizi, who sought to remove David Kalemera from his role as Senior Presidential Advisor on intelligence and strategic operations in corruption matters at the URA. The ruling was made by Justice Jane Okuo Kajuga on October 31, 2024.

Mabirizi argued that Kalemera, previously convicted by the anti-corruption court, should be disqualified from public office. However, Justice Kajuga ruled that Kalemera’s conviction did not include a disqualification order, explaining that the court could not impose such a restriction because his offences did not fall under corruption as defined by the Anti-Corruption Act. Specifically, the Act’s sections 2 through 25 outline corruption-related offences that could lead to disqualification, but Kalemera’s convictions were under the East African Community Customs Management Act 2004, which does not carry similar provisions for barring public office.

Justice Kajuga clarified that the anti-corruption court does not have the mandate to rule on issues related to employment, stating that it could not reverse appointments or bar individuals from office in cases where jurisdiction does not apply. “This court has no mandate to inquire into the employment circumstances of any individual,” she explained.

Kalemera was convicted on April 21, 2022, on charges of using falsified customs documents, under Section 203(h) of the East African Customs Management Act 2004, and conspiracy to commit a felony, under Section 390 of the Penal Code Act. Despite the conviction, no restriction was placed on his eligibility for public office, and Justice Kajuga ruled that the anti-corruption court cannot impose such a restriction where legal provisions do not explicitly apply.

Justice Kajuga also noted procedural concerns, stating that Mabirizi’s application was flawed. She emphasized that the case bore no legal grounds for a consequential order affecting Kalemera’s position, as the petition did not connect to the original criminal judgment in a way that allowed for further court intervention. Addressing Mabirizi’s reference to the Judicature Act to justify his application, Justice Kajuga stated that the Act’s provisions were misused, as they could not create jurisdiction where none existed.

Following the court’s decision, Mabirizi requested a typed record of the proceedings, intending to pursue an appeal in the court of appeal. The court approved his request to obtain the proceedings’ records. Mabirizi argued that while there was no formal restriction barring Kalemera from office, the court should consider ethical concerns around a convicted individual retaining a senior public role.