Following the allegation that the Anti-Corruption High Court Judge Lawrence Gidudu asked for a bribe from South Sudanese socialite Malong Lawrence Lual Yor to set him free, the Ugandan Judiciary has asked his lawyers to present their complaints and evidence.
A few days ago, the bribery allegations made rounds on social media where Malong claimed that the trial Judge (Justice Gidudu) asked for a bribe of USD.400,000 through his lawyer in order to acquit him of criminal charges.
In one of the videos, he alleged the judge asked for money and cautioned him that if he fails he will have to face the punishment.
However, in the statement released on Friday by the Judiciary’s Public Relations Officer Jameson Karemani, Malong underwent trial and was found guilty and subsequently convicted by the trial court on seven of the ten counts charged.
He appealed against the conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal and the same Court upheld the conviction and sentenced him to two years. The Court also reduced the compensation from USD.1,092,000 to USD.419,087.
By the time of sentencing by the Court of Appeal, he had spent the two years already which necessitated his release. The release order issued by the Assistant Registrar of the Court of Appeal indicated that the conviction was quashed and the sentence set aside whereas not. This position has since been corrected.
The statement revealed; “The advocate of Malong mentioned in the video, Mr Stephen Nelson, who represented him at the initial stages of the trial was found to have no valid practising certificate for that year and subsequently abandoned the proceedings. Hon Justice Lawrence Gidudu has NEVER met Mr Stephen Nelson or any other advocate to discuss the case involving Malong.”
The judiciary asserts that the perusal of the record of the trial court is conclusive that at no stage did Malong raise any issues regarding the allegations stated in the article and video.
“Had the author of the article and producer of the video looked at the record at the Court of Appeal, they would have established that the allegations by Malong were false. It is the position of the Judiciary that the publication is false and a scheme intended to intimidate, malign and blackmail trial judges from trying and convicting persons charged with offences similar to those that were preferred against Malong. The general public is therefore urged to ignore and treat with contempt the fabricated stories in the article and video involving Malong,” reads the statement.
The judiciary through its judicial Service Commission has however challenged Malong to make a formal complaint to the Judicial Service Commission or any other established Complaints Handling Mechanism body so that the Judge pinned is given the opportunity to be heard in line with the principles of natural justice.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at editorial@watchdoguganda.com
