The Supreme Court has paved the way for the prosecution of city property broker Muhamadi Kamoga over allegations of fraud and forgery in a 200-acre land dispute in Garuga, Wakiso District.
In a ruling delivered by Justice Monica Mugenyi, sitting as a single judge, the Court dismissed Kamoga’s application for an interim order to halt the criminal proceedings. This decision allows the trial at the Entebbe Chief Magistrate’s Court to proceed.
Kamoga, who operates Kamoga Property Consultants, had argued that the criminal case should be stayed due to a pending civil suit before the High Court involving the same land.
However, Justice Mugenyi held that the interests of justice were better served by allowing the criminal trial to continue.
“I am unable to discern any travesty of justice that an interim order of stay would seek to deflect. The ends of justice are better served by the expeditious prosecution of the criminal case,” she ruled.
Kamoga was charged in September 2023 with forgery, uttering false documents, and obtaining registration by false pretence.
The charges stem from his alleged fraudulent acquisition of 200 acres of land in Bukaya and Bugoba villages, Katabi Town Council, claimed by businessman Peter Bibangamba.
In November 2023, the High Court issued a stay on Kamoga’s prosecution, citing the ongoing civil suit as a potential conflict. However, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) appealed the decision.
The Court of Appeal overturned the stay, finding that the High Court had misapplied the law—specifically Section 209 of the Magistrates Courts Act, which governs civil, not criminal, matters.
Still dissatisfied, Kamoga petitioned the Supreme Court seeking an interim stay of execution pending his main appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 138 of 2024) and a related application (Criminal Application No. 2 of 2025).
Justice Mugenyi rejected the petition, stating that the High Court had exceeded its supervisory powers by permanently halting the prosecution—contrary to Section 17(2) of the Judicature Act, which aims to ensure timely administration of justice.
She stressed that the decision to initiate criminal proceedings lies with the DPP, and courts should only intervene in exceptional cases—such as when a fair trial is impossible or when the integrity of the justice system is at risk.
“It has not been established before me that the applicant would not undergo a fair trial… or that the criminal justice system would be compromised by his prosecution,” she stated.
Justice Mugenyi also clarified that the criminal case would not prejudice the civil proceedings, and Kamoga would still have an opportunity to defend himself, including the claim that Bibangamba voluntarily signed the disputed land transfer forms.
“The impending prosecution… would not necessarily amount to a threat to the applicant’s right to a fair trial, but rather the commencement of a legal process by the constitutionally mandated office.
Indeed, not only do criminal proceedings generally take precedence over civil proceedings, but the applicant’s civil suit would not be jeopardised by his prosecution,” she added.
Kamoga was represented by lawyer Brian Kusingura Tindyebwa, while Chief State Attorney Happiness Ainebyoona appeared for the DPP.
English 