visit this site http://connectgroups.org.au/wp-admin/includes/media.php geneva; font-size: small; line-height: 150%;”>In a huge judgement which she read for 5 hours, thumb http://collegenotester.com/applications/skeleton/views/title.php Justice Catherine Bamugemereire blamed Kashaka for going ahead with the deal despite a letter from Bank of Uganda warning of discrepancies in the proposed deal.
Bamugemereire explained that this act exposed government money to fraudsters who went ahead and embezzled it.
“He (Kashaka) ought to have exercised a high level of diligence in managing public funds and should have known that signing the deal with Amani Industrial Tools Limited was going to cause financial loss to government,” the judge noted.
Bamugemereire further faulted Bamutura who was the principal accountant for signing on the contract with the Indian company on behalf of government yet he was aware that everything was in the contract was fake.
“It is a sad tale of government officials opening government coffers to fraudsters. Due care must have been taken before signing the contract,” said the judge in what legal observers said is a water-tight ruling.
According to Bamugemereire, Amani Industrial Tools Limited from India lacked the financial muscle to operate the 70,000 bicycle deal because it was only a few days after the company was opened.
Bamugemereire further noted that it must have been intended for personal gain for the award of the contract to fraudsters, adding, the Indian company was not part of the 14 companies that had tendered in their bids for the supply of bicycles.
According to the defence lawyers in their submission during hearing of the case, Amani Impex had been able to deliver in a contract of 65,000 bicycles to which the judge disputed and explained that it was another Indian company AITEL that was involved in that deal and not Amani Impex .
Bamugemereire stressed that the said company was not among the successful bidders as it was not anywhere on the list as alleged by the interdicted public servants.
“It wasn’t anywhere on the list of 14 companies and in fact it was incorporated on September 14 2010 yet bidding had ended by September 9 2010.The contracts committee was defrauded and awarded the contract to this company which had just been formed a few weeks back and had no experience to handle contracts of this magnitude,” argued the judge.
“It was an act of white washing posing as work well done and the person who did it well knew that it was intended to defraud government and indeed did it,” the judge noted.
In her submission, the government prosecutor advised the judge to hand the six convicts maximum sentences of 14 years for causing financial loss, seven for abuse of office and seven for negligence of duty which she said would sound a warning to other public servants not to cause loss to government.
“Over Shs5bn was lost to a sham company; the sentence should therefore be a message sent out to the public that funds should be handled with more care. They should be disqualified from holding any public office for the next 10 years,” the prosecutor advised.
The judge however set Thursday July 17 as the date for announcing the sentences for the accused.