In Ayesiga Suluman V Uganda Criminal Appeal No 0294 Of 2015.
CORAM: Hellen Obura, Stephen Musota and Percy Tuhaise, JJA
The applicant Ayesiga Suluman was convicted of the offence of abuse of Office and causing Financial loss contrary to Section 11 and 20 of the Anti-Corruption Act respectively in the Magistrates Court where he later applied to the High Court which upheld the conviction of the lower court. This is an appeal in the Court of Appeal.
The appellant was employed as Senior Accounts Assistant by Kyegegwa District Local Government. In 2012 he was convicted of knowingly causing Financial loss to the state of Ugshs 37,747,301 being Forest revenue collected at Kyegegwa District.
One of the grounds of this appeal was the appellant faults the appellate Judge for not addressing himself on the law relating to contested documents as contained in Section 43 of the Evidence Act which provides that when the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, or of science or art, or as to identify of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinion upon that point of persons specially skilled in that foreign law, science or art, or in question as to identify of handwriting or finger impressions, are relevant facts, such persons are called experts.
The learned Justices discussed the ingredients for causing Financial Loss to be proved include inter alia: doing an act or omission knowing or having reason to believe that such an act or omission will cause financial loss. The issue of the forged receipt falls under the offence of false accounting therefore under the offence the appellant was convicted of it immaterial whether or not it was the appellant who issued the receipt, since by virtue of his position, he was charged with the duty of ensuring that no loss occurred to the District and an omission to do so made him liable.