The Anti-Corruption Court has fixed July 10 as the date to address a significant case involving former executives of the National Animal Genetic Resources Centre and Data Bank (NAGRC & DB), including Dr. Charles Lagu. They stand accused of improperly acquiring animal semen valued at sh1.3 billion.
This date was appointed by Chief Magistrate Joan Aciro of the Anti-Corruption Court, acting on behalf of High Court Judge Lawrence Gidudu. Aciro instructed the defendants to attend court on the specified date for the case proceedings.
The responsibility of presiding over the case was transferred to Judge Gidudu following the elevation of the previous trial judge, Margaret Tibulya, to the Court of Appeal. The legal process had encountered delays, spanning over ten months, due to the reassignment of state prosecutors by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
According to an anonymous source, state attorneys Steven Ariong and David Mugamba were reassigned to different districts, namely Kabale and Jinja, respectively.
Dr. Lagu, alongside nine other individuals, faces multiple charges, including abuse of office, corruption, fraudulent accounting, and forgery. Among the accused are procurement officer Eziekel Mukani, farm manager Clement Nuwamanya, veterinary officer Patrick Mawadri, and others.
During a recent court session, Andrew Emejeit, a senior officer from the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority (PPDA), testified. He revealed that the Solicitor General had not endorsed the sh1.3 billion contract between the government and Kibbubu Agro Suppliers Limited for animal semen supply, as mandated by law.
Emejeit expressed uncertainty regarding whether any advance payment had been made by the entity in connection with the contract. He highlighted deficiencies in the procurement process, citing a lack of specifics regarding the semen delivery, which violated PPDA regulations.
Emejeit emphasized the importance of clear procurement guidelines to avoid committing to purchases without fully understanding the requirements, potentially resulting in unsuitable supplies. He also noted the absence of evidence indicating market price assessments before entering the contract, posing a risk of overpaying.
Furthermore, Emejeit stated that procuring animal semen from Kibbubu did not meet the criteria for direct procurement, as other suppliers were available in the market. He clarified that Kibbubu acted as a middleman and not the actual manufacturer of the supplies, raising concerns about the procurement process’s transparency and efficiency.
