"Fiat Justitia Ruat Caelum"

Tanzania: New move to hasten commercial cases

Dodoma. 

Tanzania is seeking to increase the jurisdiction of lower courts to handle commercial disputes as a measure to reduce the backlog of cases at the Commercial Division of the High Court.

Resident magistrates’ courts will be allowed to handle commercial cases with up to Shs. 100 million in value involved, up from Shs. 50 million capped by the current law. The maximum threshold for the district magistrates’ courts will also more than double from the Shs. 30 million currently to Shs. 70 million. The changes are part of the proposals in the Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) (N0.4) Bill 2019 which was tabled in Parliament for first reading in June this year. The bill seeks to amend section 40(3) of the Magistrates’ Courts Act which is the principal legislation, among other acts. The bill is among the proposed laws which will be deliberated in the Parliament’s committee sessions which kicked off in Dodoma yesterday.  “The amendment aims at reducing backlog of cases that can be tried in the High Court Commercial Division,” states the proposed law in its objectives and reasons for the amendment. The bill seeks to amend seven laws including the Criminal Procedure Act by introducing plea bargaining – the system that will allow the prosecutor and the accused to negotiate in a criminal case whereby the accused will agree to plead guilty to a particular charge for some concessions.

The introduction of the plea bargaining system into Tanzania is also aimed at reducing case backlogs, prison congestions and ensure timely delivery of justice, according to the bill. The bill also intends to amend the National Prosecutions Service Act by decentralizing the powers of the director of public prosecutions to his subordinates. The proposed amendment states that the DPP may specify offences or set threshold of value involved in a case in which his subordinates may provide consent for prosecution on his behalf. This is applicable in cases which require the consent of the DPP before they are commenced in courts of law. Files of such cases are currently sent to the headquarters of the National Prosecutions Services for approvals but once the proposed changes are passed by the Parliament, it will be done in the respective regions. “This will speed the process of obtaining consent,” states the bill. The amendment also intends to give the DPP powers to compound offences and ask authorized officers to submit reports on the same.

The Commercial Division of the High Court of Tanzania has jurisdiction in commercial cases in which the value of the claim is at least Shs.100 million in case of proceedings for recovery of possession of immovable property and at least Shs. 70 million in proceedings where the subject matter is capable of being estimated at a money value. It was established to provide a positive climate for investments and install confidence within the business community in the country’s judicial system. The Commercial Court is intended to resolve disputes of a commercial nature. However, the court has no exclusive mandatory jurisdiction to hear and determine commercial dispute as a potential commercial litigant has the option of instituting a commercial case either in the Ordinary Registry of the High Court or in the Commercial Division of the High Court.

Source: The Citizen Newspaper (20/08/2019) - by Sharon Sauwa and Alawi Masare.

Tanzania jails Chinese 'Ivory Queen' 15 years for smuggling

A Tanzanian court sentenced a prominent Chinese businesswoman dubbed the “Ivory Queen” to 15 years in prison on Tuesday for smuggling the tusks of more than 350 elephants to Asia – a big victory in the battle to stamp out poaching in Africa.

Yang Feng Glan had been charged in October 2015 along with two Tanzanian men with smuggling 860 pieces of ivory between 2000 and 2004 worth 13 billion shillings ($5.6 million). She denied the charges. ($1 = 2,325 Tanzanian shillings).

Police sources said Yang, 69, had lived in Tanzania since the 1970s and was secretary-general of the Tanzania China-Africa Business Council. A Swahili-speaker, she also owns a popular Chinese restaurant in Dar es Salaam.

Kisutu Court Magistrate Huruma Shaidi sentenced Yang, Salivius Matembo and Manase Philemon to 15 years in prison on convictions of leading an organised criminal gang.

Shaidi also ordered them to either pay twice the market value of the elephant tusks or face another two years in prison.

In court documents, prosecutors said Glan “intentionally did organise, manage and finance a criminal racket by collecting, transporting or exporting and selling government trophies” weighing a total of 1.889 tonnes.

Demand for ivory from Asian countries such as China and Vietnam, where it is turned into jewels and ornaments, has led to a surge in poaching across Africa.

Tanzania’s elephant population shrank from 110,000 in 2009 to little more than 43,000 in 2014, according to a 2015 census, with conservation groups blaming “industrial-scale” poaching.

In March 2016, Tanzania sentenced two Chinese men to 35 years each in jail for ivory smuggling, while in December 2015 another court sentenced four Chinese men to 20 years in jail each after they were convicted of smuggling rhino horns.

Source: Reuters (19/02/2019)

Kenya: Private guards to carry guns

Private security guards manning public places will now be licensed to carry firearms while on duty after fresh training and vetting, authorities said Friday. 

The Private Security Regulatory Authority CEO Fazul Mohamed said this will happen in six months’ time.

Mr Mohamed spoke at the Nairobi Railways Club where all senior supervisors and managers of security firms had converged to discuss modalities of the arming of private guards in the wake of the terrorist attack in Nairobi Tuesday that left 21 people dead.

Security

The official said the proposal has been work in progress and had the blessings of the Interior ministry in collaboration with other national security organs.

"Those to be armed are in government and public installations and those in cash in transit. We are preparing for a thorough vetting of employers and guards to ensure its success," he said.

Before they are issued with specific firearms, Mr Mohamed said employers should ensure that their staff get a mandatory insurance cover.

"Security guards especially in malls form the first line of defence against terrorists and other criminal elements. If we trust them with such establishment why not trust them with firearms?" he asked.

There will be also be uniform salary structure for guard working during the day and night.

"We have been complementing the national government on security matters and we are happy that we have recognised for that contribution. We request that the process of setting up an academy for training purposes be expedited," he said.

Kenya National Private Security Workers Union Secretary-General Isaac Andabwa welcomed the proposal adding their welfare should be improved.

Source: Daily Nation (18/01/2019) - Kennedy Kimanthi.

Scotland Yard: Government didn’t kill Kayiira

Kampala.

In the conclusion of their report on the Andrew Kayiira killing, Scotland Yard made their observations on the information they gathered from the scene and from witness testimonies. Before coming to Uganda, they were cautioned of the political sensitivity of the case and they were advised to watch out for any form of political influence and report it immediately.

With no such influence to report of, the investigating officer concluded that government soldiers were not involved in the killing despite some of the attackers having either a shirt or trouser that looked like military fatigue. Their conclusion was a robbery gone bad – basing on the evidence that one of the suspects was identified by the victim and he shot him to kill evidence.

The question was whether the robbery was planned. What was left hanging was the fact that upon release from prison, Kayiira had asked his friend Gombya for all the money he had allegedly received on his behalf. 

Two months after their departure from Uganda, Gombya and his wife were interviewed by two Ugandan police officers. There were some inconsistencies in the interviews. Contradictions were noted in what Gombya told the police officers and what he had written in newspaper articles after the killing. He admitted in some parts of the interview that some of the things he said were based on hearsay.

Though the witnesses said the money was delivered to Gombya’s office in two batches in Kayiira’s presence and it was put in his car, Gombya insisted that Kayiira had no idea there was money either in his car or in the house. What is not clear is how the money was removed from the car boot without the car owner’s knowledge. Also that same night, they first went to a bar for drinks before getting home at around 10pm. Later that night, Kayiira sent Gombya to buy radio batteries as they wanted to play music and there was no power.

The inconsistences in Ms Gombya’s statement centre on the events of that night. In her Kampala police report, she said her and the girls they were with were locked up in the bathroom and did not see what happened yet in the London report she said she was in the corridors and saw the attackers enter Kayiira’s bedroom. Among the recorded stolen items from the home was Gombya’s camera but he admitted being the one who took the photos of Kayiira’s dead body and distributed them to newspapers. In his conclusion, Detective Thompson says: “Mr and Ms Gombya are basically telling the truth in respect of the events leading to the murder of Dr Kayiira; Mr Gombya, certainly either for ‘political’ reasons or otherwise is not being fully forthcoming with all he knows about the circumstances surrounding the murder on March 6, 1987.”

Kayiira betrayed by a woman?

72. It will be seen from the foregoing report that there are many options as to the type of persons who committed the offence and the motive behind it.

73. The original option that the president’s own men were behind the murder of Kayiira was in fact the strongest one when the British police officers arrived in Uganda, despite the fact that five men had been arrested. All of the suspects except one are ex-UFM men and this did not assist to quell the rumours abounding [in] Kampala. The main options are:- (1) It was robbery that went wrong when one of the suspects panicked and shot Kayiira. (2) That the suspects knew Kayiira was living at Gombya’s address, were aware that a large sum of money (Shs50 million) had been delivered to Gombya’s office when Kayiira was present and presumed that it was for Kayiira and not Gombya. (3) Had been informed that upon Kayiira’s release, he had asked for Gombya to supply him the money, which it was rumoured Gombya had received from abroad on behalf of Kayiira for his army forces, and went to rob him. (4) A combination of any of the above three with the situation presenting itself that, as alleged by the informant, the suspects, all being ex-UFM men, went to rob Kayiira and one of their number (WADDA) was recognised by Kayiira and he had to shoot him to prevent later identification to police. (5) Option 3 with the added ingredient that Gombya set up the robbery himself to solve his problems in having to return Kayiira’s money. Gombya’s actions, upon his escape, helps to support this theory.(6) The President’s own forces were behind that murder because the courts had released Kayiira for lack of evidence.

74. It is the reporting officers’ opinion that on the evidence available, government forces were not behind [the] murder of Kayiira and that the suspects knowing that he was living at Gombya’s address and having been given information that a large sum of money was on the premises and further believing it to be Kayiira’s, simply set out to rob him of it. During the robbery, one was recognised and shot him. Option 4 is, therefore, the most likely conclusion.

75. Until Gombya is interviewed at length by the Uganda Police, it is impossible to be certain of his implication in this offence if in fact he is involved and this must, therefore, remain a matter of conjecture.

76. However, he was seen on May 1, 1987, by areporting officer in London and has agreed to be interviewed by police from Uganda. Arrangements are being made through I.C.P.O. for this to be done.

77. In conclusion, [Detective Sergeant Sanderson and I would like to express our gratitude] for the assistance and co-operation given by both the Uganda Police and Ugandan authorities and also the British High Commissioner, Uganda.

78. Submitted for information with a request that a copy of the report be forwarded to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office for their information and that the British High Commissioner in Kampala, and a copy forwarded to Mr Luke Ofungi, the Inspector General of Police, Kampala, Uganda.

79. With further reference to the investigations into the murder of Dr [Andrew Kayiira, 46], on March 6, 1987, at Lukuli-Konge Village, Kampala, Uganda and in particular to paragraph 76 of my report dated May 7, 1987.

80. On Sunday, May 24, 1987, the Director of CID-Uganda Samuel Mugambya together with Deputy Assistant Inspector George Byabashaija travelled to London in order to interview [Mr Henry Gombya, 34, and his ‘wife’ Vicky Naava Mugerwa, 23], both of whom give their address as 15, Crawford Place, London, W.1.

81.On Tuesday, May 26, 1987, Mr Gombya attended New Scotland Yard with his legal representative Mr Akena Adoko and was interviewed by two Ugandan police officers. A written statement was taken from Gombya by the Ugandan officers and signed by him.

82. On Wednesday, May 27, 1987, Gombya’s ‘wife’ Vicky Mugerwa attended New Scotland Yard and was also interviewed by the two Ugandan police officers and a signed written statement taken. This was also in the presence of Mr Adoko. Mr Gombya was not present.

Escape. The thugs flee after killing Dr Andrew

Escape. The thugs flee after killing Dr Andrew Kayiira.

83. It should be pointed out at this stage that Mr Adoko is the cousin of former president Milton Obote.

84. As the original statements are in the possession of the Ugandan police officers, it is not the intention to fully reiterate the full contents of the statements by the Gombyas but to highlight the main salient points. Copies of the full statements are attached to the main correspondence.

85. The Gombya’s married ‘customarily’ in July 1986 and lived at Entebbe Airport Hotel for eight months. Mr Gombya has another wife by the name of Penina and has four children by his marriage (three boys and one girl).

86. In February/March 1986, they moved to Lukuli Konge Village near Kampala, in a large three-bedroom house rented for the sum of Shs1.4 million per month (700 pounds) by Gombya and where Andrew Kayiira lived upon his release from prison on February 24, 1987, and where he was subsequently murdered on March 6, 1987.

87. Apparently, Mr Gombya first met Kayiira during peace talks in August 1985 at Hotel Intercontinental-Nairobi and a man named Aloysius Bossa of Munno Publications was also present. Since that date, Mr Gombya states he had regular contacts with Kayiira, including a time in 1986 when he accompanied him on a tour of western Uganda. Dr Kayiira was a minister at that time.

88. Since then, both Gombya and Kayiira had been friends and one of the reasons that Gombya allowed him to move into his house upon his release from prison was that Kayiira had protected him in 1985 during the regime of Tito Okello when Gombya’s house was raided by soldiers of the Ugandan National Liberation Army (UNLA). In fact it was Gombya who Kayiira approached in order to be interviewed for BBC upon his release from prison.

89. It is also interesting to note that Gombya also allowed Kayiira to use his Kampala office and also [as a contact address].

90. In respect of the Shs40 million (20,000 pounds) referred to in the previous report, Gombya states he received it in two parts from a businessman named Katerega and was for ‘my personal expenses, including my birthday party’. He also states that the money ‘was neither borrowed nor donated to me by Katerega but it was for business purposes’.

91. The money was in bundles of Shs5 million and consisted of 5,000 notes, which were placed by Gombya in a cardboard box.

92. Gombya stated that Kayiira only saw Shs20 million being delivered and would not have been aware of the remaining money. This surely cannot be so if it is remembered that two witnesses state that the money, Shs50 million not Shs40 million, was in fact delivered in two parts, that is Shs10 million and Shs40 million, and Dr Kayiira was present in Gombya’s office when the cash was delivered and would have seen it. Further, Gombya states that his office messenger, Edward Lubwama, put it in Kayiira’s car boot and also that a friend named Kadduke had locked the car boot after it was closed.

93. Gombya and Kayiira subsequently returned home at about 10pm after they had stopped for drinks at a bar and also dropped off two girls. At the house when they arrived, apart from Gombya’s family, was Kayiira’s friend named Kayiwa and also Gombya’s office manager, Hussein Kabogoza. Although both these persons left shortly after Gombya’s arrival, he is sure that they did not know of the large amount of money that he had.

94. Between 10.30pm and 11.30pm, Gombya went out at Kayiira’s request and purchased batteries for the radio. Upon his return, they and the family were dancing and eating on the patio outside the house when they were attacked by a group of about 10 men who had torches and came from around both sides of the house.

95. The attackers were in different states of dress; some had shirts (combat), some did not, and some, according to Gombya, had clothing similar to that worn by the National Resistance Army. Only two of the attackers had guns described by Gombya as AK47 and the person apparently giving the command was in civilian clothes. The language used was Luganda.

96. The sequence of the events that subsequently took place is confusing due to the darkness (no electricity) as described in paragraph 30-37 in the previous report. Suffice it to say Ms Gombya confirms her earlier statement to police although this time she states she was in the corridor and saw the attackers go into Kayiira’s bedroom and shoot him, whereas in the previous statement she was in the bathroom with other members of the family and did not see what happened.

97. Gombya’s description of events is still basically consistent with that given in his earlier statement to police in Uganda and it is important to note very much milder in context to that expressed by him in the various newspapers and publications to whom he has given interviews. On this point, Gombya admits that some of the opinions expressed by him in newspapers etc., were based on hearsay.

98. Gombya confirms that he in fact took the photograph of the body of Kayiira that has appeared in the various press publications, including The Standard of Nairobi. He has informed me that he will supply the photographs to me in order that they can be forwarded to the Uganda Police. He will not release the negatives.

99. Mr and Ms Gombya both state that they would like to return to Uganda but both feel that it is not politically safe for them to do so. Both have, they say, applied to the UK authorities to remain in the UK for the time being.

100. Conclusions. Without doubt, Gombya appears to be getting himself politically involved if the general background of the people and circumstances of this tragic incident are examined, including his reported remarks to the newspapers. As a BBC stringer/journalist, his choice of actions give rise to suspicion that his position as an ‘impartial’ witness is being impaired by the original rumour that NRA soldiers were involved in the murder of his close friend Kayiira. He agreed that he has no real evidence of this for although some of the attackers were wearing combat type clothing, this is the general dress of a large number of persons in Kampala and its importance is not so clear-cut as it might first appear.

101 Gombya is clearly not anxious to give the real reason for his possession of the large sum of money (see paragraph 90), which supports the original theory of black-market money dealing or trying to recoup money belonging to Kayiira, which he may have had and misappropriated. This last suggestion he denies. He does not admit the first suggestion but neither does he deny it.

102 It is the reporting officers’ opinion that although Mr and Ms Gombya are basically telling the truth in respect of the events leading to the murder of Kayiira, Gombya, certainly either for ‘political’ reasons or otherwise is not being fully forthcoming with all he knows about the circumstances surrounding the murder on 6th March, 1987.

103 It is, however, still the reporting officers’ opinion that on the evidence available, there is no evidence to implicate the President or his army and that the incident is as previously stated at paragraph 74 in previous report, a robbery that went wrong, for many people must surely have known about the large sums of money in his possession.

What stakeholders say

Israel Mayengo. Shortly after Kayiira’s arrest, more people were arrested on the same charges. Among those is Israel Mayengo who was also released on the same day with Kayiira. He insists as long as the Scotland Yard report does not point to the exact person or agency responsible for Kayiira’s death. With the report exonerating government from the murder, he wonders why on the same night he was being hunted by armed men. 

“On the very night that Kayiira was killed, four armed men came to where I was staying, looking for me at 3am. Fortunately that night I had not slept there. We had been released from prison together on the same charge.”

Gerald Seranda, DP Secretary General believes despite the delayed release of the report as a party and the family of the late Kayiira can make use of it. “What we can do with that report now is just for postmortem to know the reality what happened. And also find out if we can continue living with the people who might have played a role in the murder.”

Source: Daily Monitor (26/11/2018)

ICC: Fatou Bensouda hunts for 3 Kenyans in PEV cases

Nairobi.


Ghosts of the 2007/08 post-election violence have returned to haunt suspects, with the International Criminal Court (ICC) calling for the arrest of three Kenyans suspected of witness interference.

Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has said that lawyers Paul Gicheru and Phillip Kipkoech Bett (alias Kipseng'erya) and journalist Walter Osapiri Barasa, who remain at large, are wanted by her office for trial.

EXTRADITION

Last year in November, the High Court in Kenya stopped their extradition to the ICC but Ms Bensouda is adamant that they ought to be extradited.

“ICC relies on State cooperation worldwide to arrest and transfer (suspects) to the Court,” the court posted on its Twitter handle, in regard to each of the three suspects.

The three are among 15 other suspects from various countries wanted by the The Hague-based court for criminal trial.

The two lawyers are wanted by the Office of The Prosecutor (OTP) for allegedly corruptly influencing a total of six prosecution witnesses.

Mr Barasa is also accused of trying to bribe someone he thought was a prosecution witness in the case against Deputy President William Ruto.

WARRANT

“The arrest warrant was issued under seal against Mr Barasa on August 2, 2013 and unsealed on October 2, 2013," the statement says.

"The case remains at the pre-trial stage, pending the suspect’s arrest or voluntary appearance before the court. The ICC does not try individuals in their absence."

The court’s position is the same on the cases against Mr Gicheru and Mr Bett.

The warrant of arrest was issued under seal against the two on March 10, 2015 and unsealed on September 10, 2015.

In its decision, the court found that the evidence submitted by the prosecution demonstrated that “they were involved in an organised and systematic criminal scheme, aimed at approaching and corrupting prosecution witnesses through bribes and other inducements, in exchange for their withdrawal as witnesses and/or recantation of their prior statements to the prosecution.”

On November 7, during a seminar on arrests at ICC headquarters, Ms Bensouda said the court’s judicial machinery is likely to be frustrated and held in abeyance unless persons sought by the ICC are arrested and made to appear before the court.

“High-level political commitment and consistent diplomatic coordination between states and other actors is needed to address the arrest challenge," she said.

"If left unaddressed, it will have negligible impact on specific or general deterrence and prevention of the world’s gravest crimes."

EXPEDIENCY

She added that ICC arrest warrants must not be cast aside as mere inconveniences in inter and intra-state politics, or traded away in the service of political expediency.

"From the moment the court’s judges issue an arrest warrant, responsibility for its execution falls on States Parties, as the Court's executive arm, alongside any other States that may be under an obligation to cooperate,” sated Ms Bensouda.

"Impunity and instability are closely interrelated. When an alleged perpetrator of Rome Statute crimes remains at large, he or she may continue to commit crimes."

She called for action, not only through vocal support and public statements but also at the operational level.

“State Parties and Assembly of State Parties must take appropriate action in response to the court’s findings of non-compliance on failure to arrest and surrender ICC suspects,” she added.

"My Office will continue to pursue non-compliance findings under Article 87 (7) of Rome Statute."

Cases against three Kenyans, President Uhuru Kenyatta, Mr Ruto and broadcaster Joshua Sang were withdrawn due to insufficient evidence.

WITHDRAWN

The case against President Kenyatta was withdrawn on December 5, 2014 while that against his deputy and Mr Sang was withdrawn on April 5, 2016.

They had been indicted by the court for the crimes committed during the post-election violence that claimed 1,133 lives and displaced over 650,000 people.

Source: Daily Nation (26/11/2018)

Ethiopia arrests 63 suspected of rights abuses, corruption

Addis Ababa.

Ethiopia has arrested 63 intelligence officials, military personnel and businesspeople on allegations of rights violations and corruption, the country's attorney general announced on Monday.

The sweeping high-profile arrests carried out in recent days are a result of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's order for a months-long investigation into misdoings under the previous government.

Attorney General Berhanu Tsegaye told the media that some of those arrested are suspected of abuses of prisoners including "beatings, forced confessions, rape, electrocution and even killings".

Some of those arrested are accused of mismanaging a state-owned military corporation, the Metal and Engineering Corporation, that was looted in a multi-billion dollar corruption scheme, he said.

Berhanu also said that Ethiopia's former spy chief is suspected of involvement in an attempt to assassinate the new prime minster at a rally on June 23. While other officials implicated in the plot have fled the country, the former intelligence chief is now residing in northern Ethiopia and should turn himself in to authorities, he said.

Yilikal Getnet, an opposition figure, told The Associated Press the public had demanded the arrests of the former officials.

"These have been issues that we in the opposition have long been calling for, too," he said, adding that Ethiopia needs a truth and reconciliation process to investigate past misdoings. "The ruling party alone can't bring justice for all these atrocities committed in the past."

Since Abiy, 42, came to power in April his new government has released several thousand political prisoners, permitted exiled opposition groups to return home, dropped terror charges against prominent opposition politicians and permitted the media to operate more freely.

Source: Agencies (13/11/2018).

Kenya: CJ Maraga calls for laws on medical technology

Nairobi.

Chief Justice David Maraga has asked MPs to formulate laws that address ethical issues in advancement of medical technologies that include genetic manipulation.

Speaking during the launch of a book authored by Supreme Court judge Isaac Lenaola and Kabianga University’s deputy vice-chancellor, Prof Marion Mutugi, Justice Maraga said advanced technology has resulted in grey areas on what is ethically right or wrong as well as legal.

“I wish to challenge the legislators to come up with appropriate legislation to bridge this gap because medical technology is advancing faster,” said Mr Maraga. The book authored by Prof Mutugi, who is a biomedical researcher, and Justice Lenaola, is titled Bioethics of medical advances and genetic manipulation.

It focuses on legal and ethical issues raised by scientific advances as well as emerging procedures in the medical field. It also raises questions on the issue of technology used in solving problems of human reproduction and fertility, therapeutic genetic engineering and the production of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The question of sex orientation, transsexuals, transgender and individual human rights has also been discussed in the book while being related to legal, philosophical and moral aspects of the country as well as the rest of the world.

The Chief Justice said the duo had made a gallant contribution in writing the multidisciplinary book, which took seven years to be completed and published.

He also pointed out that bioethics should be considered as a learning topic in institutions of higher learning.

Justice Lenaola said that judges always face difficulties in handling cases that involve issues like surrogacy, homosexuality, transgender, assisted fertility and lesbianism since there are no laws in the country about them.

However, he pointed out that the issues raise ethical questions and the right to information yet some of them are supported by the advancement in technology.

All Supreme Court judges and a majority of lawyers as well as family of the two authors were present during the book launch in Nairobi.

 Source: Daily Nation (15/11/2018).

Uganda: Two suspects arrested over attacks on Chinese investors

Kampala. 

Police have arrested two suspects in the raid on a Chinese company last month after reviewing evidence captured on the factory’s CCTV footage.

Mr Emilian Kayima, the Police Spokesperson, told Daily Monitor yesterday that the suspects were sufficiently identified from evidence of the CCTV footage provided by the company. He said the suspects are detained at Mukono Police Station. 

“We used our intelligence from the community and the neighbours. We identified and arrested some of the suspects who are already pinned by the video footages,” Mr Kayima said.

Mr Chen Fan, the director of CCLE Rubber Company, which was attacked on October 23, was called to the police station to identify the suspects. 

“We have seen the same faces on the CCTV camera and I hope they can be dealt with so that the problem stops,” Mr Fan said.

Weighing options

Following the growing spate of armed attacks and robberies on their members and factories, which involved loss of life and property, Chinese investors said they were weighing the option of leaving Uganda to invest elsewhere. 

On Wednesday last week, the investors met Minister of Internal Affairs Jeje Odongo, Security Minister Elly Tumwine, the Inspector General of Police, Martins Okoth Ochola, Director General of Internal Security Organisation Kaka Bagyenda, Mr Ronald Kibuule (Mukono North MP) to seek a solution.

In response to the Chinese cry, government promised to provide security guards to ensure safety of the investors and their investments. 

During a meeting with President Museveni at State House Entebbe on Tuesday, Chinese Ambassador Zheng Zhu Qiang expressed dissatisfaction in the security system for failing to provide a safe atmosphere for the Chinese investors. 

President Museveni reassured him that there would be permanent security on Industrial Park areas and factories.

“Some thugs have been attacking Chinese investors but we shall defeat them.

This is temporary, shallow and shall be defeated. There were attacks in Mukono and Mityana; one experienced by the Gayaza Road construction company and the recent one in Zirobwe. The security of Uganda is very good but urban insurgency was not paid attention to. Tell the Government of China that I am personally handling this issue,” President Museveni told Mr Zheng.

Source: Daily Monitor (15/11/2018)

CNN sues Trump administration over ban of journalist Jim Acosta

CNN filed a lawsuit Tuesday against US President Donald Trump and others in his administration, requesting that chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta’s access be restored.

The lawsuit makes claims under the First and Fifth Amendments along with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

In the First Amendment claim, CNN points out that the president’s dislike for Acosta is not sufficient to restrict his First Amendment rights to question the president at press events. “The sole justification for Defendants’ conduct is their dislike for Plaintiffs’ coverage of the administration and critique of the President. But that is insufficient to justify such a substantial restriction on Plaintiffs’ First Amendment rights.”

CNN also claims the Trump administration revoked Acosta’s credentials without the due process guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment.

Under the APA, CNN alleges that the Trump administration’s revocation of Acosta’s credentials was “arbitrary and capricious.”

Source: jurist.org (13/11/2018).

How to answer the most common interview questions


Though you can never predict exactly how an interview will go, there are certain common interview questions that come up time and time again. By preparing and practicing your answers to these questions, you’ll feel more in control and confident throughout your interview. This article gives you a perspective on how to effectively answer the most common interview questions used by recruiters.

1.    Tell me/us about yourself
Though this seems like a very simple question, don’t be deceived – in a high-pressure interview situation it can be difficult to find the balance between saying the right things, oversharing, and not sharing enough. Employers ask this question to get you talking, to get a feel of your personality and people skills, and to use as a springboard for further questions – so mention the points you want to discuss (such as your university experience, your involvement in clubs or societies, or your passion for this industry). Avoid! Being too personal, being too vague (make yourself a memorable candidate!), or speaking for too long (keep it short, sweet, and to the point).
2.    Why do you want to work for me/us?
Employers ask this question to find out how much you know about the company, gauge how eager you are to work for them, and to assess whether your goals match their objectives. It’s the perfect time to highlight the reasons why you’re a great fit for their company, and to show them how much you want to work for them. Avoid! Giving an uninformed answer which shows you haven’t done your research, giving the impression that you don’t care about getting the job, or focusing on finding ‘any’ graduate job.
3.    Why should I/we hire you?
This tricky-to-answer question requires you to sell yourself without sounding arrogant. Essentially, it’s your chance to highlight what makes you unique, and show the employer why they should choose you over the next person. Employers want to see that you are confident in your skills – so support all your statements with solid evidence. Avoid! Being too modest, discussing skills that aren’t relevant to the role, or reeling off a list of skills without backing them up with evidence.
4.    What are your strengths and weaknesses?
Employers ask this question to gauge how self-aware you are. There’s no harm in admitting a weakness, and by showing the employer that you are conscious of it you’re also indicating that you can take steps to turn it into a strength. Likewise, stating a strength implies that you are confident in your abilities and can offer great benefits to their company. Avoid! Trying to spin a strength as a weakness, claiming that you don’t have any weaknesses at all, or giving irrelevant answers.
5.    What has been your biggest achievement?
This question can be particularly tricky, as it requires you to pick just one achievement that is relevant to this employer and their company – exactly why it’s so important to prepare your answer beforehand. The employer wants to know that you are a high achiever – so the best approach is to choose an achievement that is recent and unique. You’ll need to discuss how you went about accomplishing it, and the outcome or consequences of the achievement. Avoid! Choosing your degree as your greatest achievement, lying, or giving an unprofessional example.
6.    What are your hobbies and interests?
This question is a chance for you to show the employer who you are outside of the workplace – as well as demonstrate your transferable skills. The best approach is to discuss genuine hobbies and the skills that they have taught you. For example, if you’ve been heavily involved in sports throughout university, discuss how you’ve worked well as part of a team, been involved in organising events, or have been resilient when things didn’t go your way. Avoid! Lying, mentioning hobbies or interests that are unprofessional, or being too generic about your interests (remember, a lot of people enjoy watching TV!)

7.    Where do you see yourself in 5 years?
With this question, the employer is trying to ascertain whether your goals align with theirs and ensure that this role fits into your long-term plan. The best approach is to show that you are ambitious (show how you’ll want to progress within 5 years) but also that you see yourself in this line of work. Avoid! Being unrealistic, under-selling yourself, or saying that you don’t know.
8.    Do you have any questions for me/us?
Often asked at the end of a job interview, the questions you choose to ask (which should always be determined before!) the employer will be able to judge whether you’re a good fit for the role and see if you have researched the company. It’s the perfect opportunity for you to find out key details about the role or the company you are applying to. Avoid! Not having any questions prepared, asking generic or vague questions, and not listening to their answers!
Credit: Jessica Ching (06/11/2018)

JURIST - Paper Chase

Blog Archive

Followers