The Grade One Magistrates Court in Jinja District has upheld the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)'s decision to take over the criminal case against the Kyabazinga of Busoga, His Royal Majesty William Wilberforce Gabula Kadhumbula Nadiope IV. The case was initiated by Hassan Male Mabirizi, who accused the Busoga King and his newlywed wife of engaging in an illegal marriage.
Mabirizi also sued Archbishop Stephen Kaziimba Mugalu, who presided over the marriage vows, and Buganda queen Nnaabagereka Sylvia Nagginda, who signed the marriage certificate as a witness. According to Mabirizi, the marriage ceremony at Christ Cathedral Bugembe was invalid, criminal, and void because Nadiope had previously married Alison Anna in December 2016 in England.
The charges Mabirizi levied include fictitious marriage, bigamy, marriage with a person previously married, unlawfully performing a marriage ceremony, and conspiracy to commit felonies against Archbishop Kaziimba and Queen Sylvia. The DPP, through the Resident State Attorney of Jinja, took over proceedings with a letter dated November 21, 2023.
On Friday, Grade One Magistrate Anxious Atumanya dismissed Mabirizi’s application, stating that the law allows the DPP to take over proceedings at any stage before their conclusion. She emphasized that the DPP does not require the court's consent to take over a case but only needs it when withdrawing a case. According to Section 43 (1) of the Magistrates Act Cap 16, the DPP can take over criminal proceedings instituted by a person other than a public prosecutor or police officer.
Magistrate Atumanya also ruled that Mabirizi wrongly sued the Directorate of Public Prosecutions. She stated that the DPP is a government department and not a body corporate with the power to sue or be sued.
"Based on the above authority, the DPP cannot be sued as that office cannot sue or be sued. I find that the application was wrongly instituted against the respondent and as such, the same cannot stand and ought to be struck out," Atumanya said.
She concluded that the takeover letter was properly filed before the Court, and Mabirizi ceased being the prosecutor. Following the decision, Mabirizi immediately appealed to the High Court, seeking to have the ruling set aside. He argued that the Chief Magistrate ignored statutory and constitutional provisions and decided cases placed before her, acting against substantive justice by holding that the DPP’s actions cannot be challenged other than by suing the Attorney General.
The case will return to court on July 3.
