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)