Kampala-Court has Okayed Law Development Centre to investigate two opposition politicians and Kampala lawyers, Michael Mabikke and Fred Mukasa for alleged examination malpractice.
The two took LDC to Court with a view of blocking the centre from conducting investigations into their past papers and if possible recall the post graduate Diplomas they earned from there. LDC wanted to ascertain whether it was true that the two were aided to pass exams.
The Court of Appeal ruling indicated that LDC has powers to constitute forensic committee to investigate allegations of indecency in its examination processes and examination results are opposite to what the duo had planned.
The examination malpractices were committed between the periods of the Bar Course examination of 2004/05 to 2010/11.
“The management committee of the respondent has very wide powers under Section 4 and 8 of the LDC Act. It was well within its powers to set up a forensic committee to investigate the allegations and come with a report that would form the basis of the decision by the management committee as to whether or not there existed substance in the allegations as to require a fully flagged investigation.” ruled justices; Geoffrey Kiryabwire, Kenneth Kakuru and Augustine Nshimye.
The two politicians petitioned the High Court by way of judicial review seeking among others to stop further forensic audit investigations and also nullifying. The same Court dismissed the case in LDC favour with costs.
Mabikke and Mbidde had told Court that Justice Vincent Zehurikize erred in law when he did not find out that the forensic audit committee of the Bar Course examinations was not properly appointed and that same should have been declared null and void.
“The forensic audit committee therefore was not a tribunal and as such it was not required to take evidence or to make any binding decisions.” The three judges ruled.
It continued, “There was no accuser or accused before the forensic audit committee and there was no dispute before it to resolve. As already stated it was only to gather data and information and as such it was not a tribunal.”
