Kampala — The trial of Molly Katanga took a dramatic turn on the second day of hearing on Wednesday after the Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Ms. Samali Wakooli, who is the prosecution counsel, h
was accused of conflict of interest and potential bias.
Ms. Molly Katanga’s lawyers, led by Counsels Bruce Musinguzi and Peter Kabasi, raised objections to Wakooli’s alleged continued involvement in the case, citing Advocates Conduct Regulations— before accusing her of potential attempt to forge evidence against their client.
According to the defence team, Ms. Wakooli prepared and signed the indictment on January 22, 2024, which included references to a DNA report that did not exist at the time.
The lawyers claim, this indicates prosecutorial bias and fallacy, and are seeking Wakooli’s recusal from the case and potential testimony as a witness.
“The DNA report was not available when the indictment was prepared, yet it was extensively referenced,” Counsel Musinguzi said. “This raises serious questions about the prosecution’s conduct and the integrity of the evidence.”
Musinguzi also highlighted concerns about the handling of crime scene samples. “We have reason to believe that critical samples were tampered with, which could have compromised the entire investigation,” he said.
He added: “My lord, on April 30th, the DNA report was prepared and signed. We request that Samali Wakooli appear as a witness for four reasons. Firstly, this was a prosecution-led investigation, and at the time of preparing and signing the indictment on January 22nd, 2024, the DNA report, which is the basis of paragraph 32, did not exist. Despite this, the case summary makes extensive references to the DNA report. Therefore, we require Samali Wakooli to explain the basis of paragraph 32 of the summary of the indictment. We believe there is a high likelihood of prosecutorial bias, resulting in a prosecutorial fallacy, and we need her to clarify where she obtained the facts for paragraph 32, as the DNA report did not exist at that time.”
The defense alleges that Wakooli’s involvement in the case has compromised the integrity of the investigation and the trial, and that her continued participation would be a violation of the Advocates Conduct Regulations and the principles of fair trial.
