Finance

Finance (446)

Govt Should Compensate Sudhir For Crane Bank Losses – MP Lutamaguzi

The government of Uganda should expedite the compensation of tycoon Sudhir Ruparelia for all the losses he incurred during the wrongful closure of his bank Crane bank Ltd, Paulson Lutamaguzi Ssemakula, the Nakaseke South Member of parliament has said.

While appearing on CBS radio talk show last evening, Hon Lutamaguzi said that if it was not for the jungle being practiced by those in office, Dr Sudhir would have been compensated as directed by courts adding that it is his rights to be compensated as directed by commercial court.

He also called for the complete overhaul of the entire Bank of Uganda saying that if the same people are still in office no fruitful investigations will ever be conducted on its operations saying that whoever that tries to investigate it including parliament is bribed and cases die.

The legislator who also sits on finance committee of parliament explained that the overhauling of the Central bank and other institutions of government would help to eliminate all the mess being done by those who think are the untouchables.

Lawyer Ssemakadde of the Center for Legal Trust on the other hand also noted that Bank of Uganda and its legal advisors are wrongly interpreting the financial institutions Act by rushing to illegally liquidate Crane Bank.

SOURCE: Command1Post

 

BoU Battle With Ruparelia Group Unhealthy For Uganda’s Economy

By Ben Ssebuguzi

One of the online news sites, CEO magazine, carried a big headline: “BoU purported liquidation of Crane bank is illegal,”. This is not the first time Bank of Uganda (BoU) is seen in an apparent battle with Ugandan investors.

There are a number of other cases including; HCCS 493/2017 and civil appeal 252/19 both filed by BoU to influence the illegal liquidation of defunct Crane bank which is an asset of Ruparelia group.

It seems like BoU officials are disguising under the Financial Institutions Act 2004 to abuse their offices and torment our investors. This vice cannot be left to flourish by the youths of Uganda yet we always look up to investors to get employment.

After the NRM led by President Museveni took over power in 1986, they instituted The Departed Asians Property Custodian Board (DAPCB) with the purpose of returning Asian properties confiscated by late President Amin in 1972, this portrayed to the investors around the world that we respect and protect the rights of investors.

This has earned as a good reputation as we have seen an influx of many investors in Uganda of which is a good achievement which needs to be guarded.

What is happening currently at BoU is more likely to run down the drain the achievements of this country.

Even despite other Accountability bodies including, The Auditor General and COSASE faulting their actions, they have gone ahead to prove to the whole world that they are above the law.An act which is likely to taint our good policy towards investors.

One of the significant challenges of our country is unemployment. According to AfDB report 2014, out of the unemployed people in Uganda, 83% are youths, which call for urgent attention by government agencies like BoU to work towards reducing unemployment. To the contrary, the aforesaid is seen to be acting in bad faith.

As young people; we get concerned when we see bad people with selfish interest use their powers to torment investors who are our lifeline hence taking away their precious time to think and establish other projects to employ more Ugandans.

In a nutshell, BoU is washing and drying it’s linen in sand. We, therefore, plead with the line minister of finance to continue to remove the bad apples in BoU in order to save the situation before the tax payers money is put to waste.

Ben Ssebuguzi is a budding economist and Secretary General of Uganda Poor Youth Movement.

SOURCE: Command1Post

BoU Lawyers Seek Attorney General Help In Ruparelia Case

Bank of Uganda (BoU) lawyers led by Margaret K Kasule have implored their boss, the governor, Prof. Emmanuel Mutebile to personally reach out to the Attorney General William Byaruhanga asking him to urgently constitute a team of excellent government lawyers to join them in arguing and prosecuting their anti-Sudhir Ruparelia appeal case in the Supreme Court, Mulengera News reports.

The Central Bank appealed to Supreme Court (which has set January next year as the date to commence the hearing) after losing in both High Court and Court of Appeal where the judges held that BoU had to get out of the Crane Bank Ltd (CBL) matters since their receivership period had ended in January 2018.

BoU getting out at the end of the receivership period leads to only one outcome and that is Sudhir Ruparelia moving in and resuming the directorship and shareholder status over CBL.

Indeed, many legal experts assert that once the receivership period ends, whatever remains of the company reverts to the original directors and shareholders who indeed continue to legally dispute BoU’s insistence to keep their company under receivership (which they assert technically ended upon the sale of CBL assets to DFCU bank).

This is something the Bank of Uganda lawyers are up against and it’s the reason they are in Supreme Court (where Ruparelia floored their application last Monday seeking to prevent him from writing to URSB) to overturn the two lower court decisions. Claiming Sudhir (who recently wrote to URSB seeking to be reinstated and others as Directors/Shareholders of CBL) is a very dangerous man, BoU lawyers are pressurizing Mutebile to consolidate the central bank’s legal representation in the Supreme Court by leveraging on the large reservoir of very experienced lawyers resident in the AG chambers.

In her 27th October 4 page brief to the governor, Legal Counsel Margaret Kasule demands that her boss Mutebile urgently secures a meeting with the AG personally to which the veteran economist from Kabale is advised to carry some members of the BoU legal team so that their point (seeking some legal support) is adequately emphasized to the AG.

Mutebile is implored to realize the importance of dealing with nobody else at the AG chambers but the Attorney General himself because the Sudhir matter is urgent and sensitive. Kasule references to an earlier board resolution directing management to reach out and solicit legal support from the AG chambers.

At the AG, Mutebile is advised to engage “the highest office [implying the AG himself William Byaruhanga]” because Supreme Court being the apex in the hierarchy of courts, there will be no other way out in case Sudhir’s KAA lawyers once again floor the Central Bank.

Saying their views on the matter are consistent with the independent legal opinion previously obtained from external lawyers of Shonubi & Co Advocates, the BoU lawyers also advise their boss to urgently constitute an anti-Sudhir task force comprising of members from BoU’s legal department, commercial bank supervision department and that of Board Affairs.

Kasule advises that this task force should urgently trace, label and put together all key documents relating to insider lending loans at CBL, progressive supervision reports, MoUs, capital calls and exhibits/documentary evidence corroborating the contents of the forensic investigations report that was compiled by PWC.

All this preparation is justified by Ms Kasule as very necessary to prepare for multiple legal actions they anticipate Sudhir Ruparelia will be commencing in future the moment he succeeds in getting URSB reinstate him and others as directors and shareholders of whatever remains of a company called CBL.

In the same memo, Ms Kasule implores Mutebile to realize the need to urgently preserve and centralize custody of all documents relating to CBL’s assets that are remaining. She also reminds Mutebile of her May 2020 written advice demanding that whatever remains of CBL be escalated into liquidation ostensibly to protect pending creditor claims which she doesn’t disclose.

That unless this liquidation process is fast-tracked (and a liquidator appointed), Sudhir could move faster leading to a situation where BoU (acting as CBL) wins in vain should Supreme Court Justice agree with them and overturn the pro-Sudhir decision in the Court of Appeal. Saying progressing the situation into liquidation won’t in any way amount to prejudicing the appeal process before the Supreme Court, Ms Kasule says this is something the Governor ought to urgently authorize.

She informs the Governor that hers is a prudent proposal since even the Central Bank’s external lawyers of Shonubi & Co Advocates had previously independently advised on the same progression. She also advises Mutebile to authorize the hiring of an external debt collector to recover the money that remain uncollected from officials that borrowed it from CBL under insider lending.

The same role had previously been assigned to BoU’s department of Bank Supervision whose performance or progress thus far Ms Kasule doesn’t seem to be comfortable with. She says there is need to urgently establish how much has been collected or recovered so far and what is pending. “It’s critical that the process of collection is pursued to avoid being caught by the law of limitation.”

 

The powerful BoU Legal Counsel also registers her frustration with the fact that the Ruparelia legal team members have had to create an impasse while using “legalistic arguments to tie the hand of the Central Bank while attempting to change the status quo to render a favorable [eventual] Supreme Court ruling nugatory.” She advises the best way to circumvent such “legalistic arguments” is by progressing CBL into liquidation so that a Statutory Manager, Receiver or Liquidator can be appointed to take up the rest of the matters in the name of what remains as CBL.

Ms Kasule (who no longer has many private eminent law firms to bring on board because majority private Kampala lawyers have previously worked for or represented the Ruparelia Group whose Principal technically used that history to overcome would-be strong BoU legal representation by Bowman’s Uganda and MMAKS) comes off as clearly desperate to have Mutebile prioritize the need to personally talk to the AG so that the Central Bank’s legal team gets strengthened ahead of the Supreme Court proceedings slated for early next year. The need to bring the AG on board is something she conspicuously emphasizes in her memo.

SOURCE: Mulengera News

Supreme Court Dustbins BoU Case Against Sudhir, URSB

The Supreme Court has dismissed with costs Bank of Uganda’s (BoU) case in which Crane Bank Limited (CBL) (in receivership) filed an application against businessman Sudhir Ruparelia and Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB) seeking for an interim order preventing the businessman from claiming, taking control, repossessing or in any way interfering with the management of CBL or of its receiver until the hearing and determination of Supreme Court Civil Application No.32 of 2020.

BoU was also seeking for an interim order preventing URSB from registering any resolutions in respect of the applicant/CBL until the hearing and determination of Supreme Court Application NO. 32 of 2020.

BoU sought an injunction against what they perceived as efforts by URSB to permit Sudhir repossess CBL as a company. But in the presence of URSB’s lawyer Allan Kakungulu, Dr. Joseph Byamugisha (for BoU) and Ellison Karuhanga & Bruce Musinguzi (for Sudhir), Supreme Court’s Justice Paul Mugamba on Monday 9th November dismissed the application with costs against BoU.

In his letter to URSB, Sudhir referred to the prior finding and proclamation by High Court and Court of Appeal to the effect that the receivership period (giving BoU authority over CBL) had ended in January 2018 (having commenced on 18th January 2017).

According to the law, once the receivership period ends, whatever remains of the company reverts to the Directors and Shareholders.

In his writing, Sudhir appropriately sought to bring these two court decisions to the attention of URSB but the same alarmed BoU whose top officials construed this to be an attempt to have repossession and resume running a company called Crane Bank Ltd.

The bank’s lawyers rushed to Supreme Court and filed an application seeking an injunction against these perceived Sudhir moves but the application was dismissed with costs to Sudhir and URSB.

SOURCE: The Capital Times

 

 

Leaked Meeting Minutes Show BoU Knew Liquidating Crane Bank Was Illegal

Minutes from a leaked Bank of Uganda meeting indicate that Deputy Governor Mr. Michael Atingi-Ego chaired a meeting that resolved that the Central Bank should await a Supreme Court’s decision on the transition of Crane Bank Limited from receivership to liquidation, before he turned around and advised the Governor that the controversial liquidation should go on.

On November 9, BoU announced that it had commenced Crane Bank’s liquidation in a notice signed by Mutebile.

“Bank of Uganda (BoU) took over management of Crane Bank Ltd (CBL) on October 20, 2016 and subsequently progressed it into receivership on January 24, 2017. In exercise of its powers under section 99 (1) & (2) of the Financial Institutions Act, 2004, BoU has now placed CBL under liquidation and ordered the winding up of its affairs. The Central Bank shall be the liquidator of CBL,” the notice read.

The BoU meeting where it was resolved to await the Supreme Court decision was chaired by Atingi-Ego, the Deputy Governor and attended by Susan Kanyemibwa, Bank Secretary; Dr. Tumubweinee Twinemanzi, Executive Director Supervision and Ms. Margaret K. Kasule the Legal Counsel.

In the meeting, it was resolved that despite an October 6th 2020 external legal opinion by M/S Shonubi &. Co Advocates that had advised the Central Bank to progress Crane Bank (in Receivership) into liquidation, the same should be delayed till the Supreme Court had pronounced itself on the transition.

“Members deliberated at length and the meeting agreed BOU waits for the Supreme Court’s decision on the transition from receivership to liquidation,” reads an extract from the minutes. This decision was reached because “the issue of progression has some legal hitches.”

However, even before these legal hitches were resolved, according to information gleaned from another memo, written by Margaret Kasule, to the Governor on November 09th 2020, the Deputy Governor had earlier, on November 4th 2020 written to the Governor recommending that Crane Bank be liquidated.

“We refer to our memo of 16th October 2020 in which we gave a number of recommendations with regard to the handling of the Crane Bank Appeal in the Supreme Court and your approval of the same, following Deputy Governor’s Memo of 4th November 2020,” Ms Kasule wrote, in a memo titled “Ruling on application for an injunction in civil application No.33 of 2020- Crane Bank (in Receivership) vs. Sudhir Ruparelia and Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB).

It is from this memo that Prof. Emmanuel Tumusiime Mutebile, the BoU governor, who had since May 2019 been reluctant to approve the liquidation eventually gave a go-ahead for the liquidation to start.

Several legal minds have said the move to liquidate Crane Bank, even before the disposal of the Supreme Court case, was rushed and illegal and could cost taxpayers more in legal costs, should the shareholders of the bank decide to fight the move in court.

It has also been termed as an act of contempt of the Supreme Court in that there is a pending appeal before the Court.

“CBL ceased to be a Financial Institution within the meaning of the FIA when its license to do banking business was taken away in January 2017 (when it was put under receivership). CBL has not been on the list of licensed financial institutions since then. BOU has powers under Section 99 of the FIA to place licensed financial institutions into liquidation. But that power only applies to financial institutions, which are legally defined under Section 3 of the FIA to mean companies licensed to do financial institutions business. CBL has no such license as of November 13th, 2020 and is therefore not a financial institution that BOU can place into liquidation today,” a lawyer weighed in.

SOURCE: Matooke Republic

 

BoU Boss Admits Not Having Key Crane Bank Documents

The Executive Director Supervision at Bank of Uganda (BoU), Dr. Tumubweinee Twinemanzi has shockingly revealed that he doesn’t have some key documents on Crane Bank Ltd (in receivership).

He made the revelation during the October 28, 2020 meeting to discuss BoU’s strategy on Crane Bank.

The meeting was chaired by BoU Deputy Governor, Michael  Atingi-Ego and attended by Susan Kanyemibwa (Bank Secretary), Dr. Tumubweinee Twinemanzi (Executive Director Supervision), Margret K. Kasule (Legal Counsel) and  Benedict Makanga (Minute Recorder.)

According to leaked details of the meeting, BoU’s Legal Counsel informed the meeting that Crane Bank documents are not stored in one place. These are scattered in various Bank offices, she said.

She noted that that security and safe custody of all Crane Bank documents should be given priority.

At this point, she informed the meeting that PwC had submitted to BoU original documents supporting the forensic investigations findings regarding Crane Bank and these are kept in the Supervision Department. She said some of the documents are laminated.

However, Twinemanzi was “surprised that such document existed or even it was even in his possession.”

“The EDS (Executive Director Supervision) requested the meeting to provide information as to whom these documents had been assigned, since he had never seen them or were they a part of the handover process with his predecessor,” the leaked document about the meeting reads in part. It’s not clear whether the documents in question have been given to him.

Twinemanzi was appointed BoU’s Executive Director Supervision on February 7, 2018 after the Central Bank refused to renew the contract of Justine Bagyenda.

It should be noted that Bank of Uganda on Friday November 13, 2020 announced that it had placed Crane Bank Limited (CBL) in receivership under liquidation and ordered the winding up of its affairs.

Winding up is the process where a company ceases operations, with liquidation being the stage where company assets are sold off to pay creditors.

In a statement, BoU Governor, Prof. Emmanuel Tumusiime-Mutebile said that the Central Bank is exercising its powers under section 99 (1) & (2) of the Financial Institutions Act, 2004.

It should be noted that BoU controversially took over management of Crane Bank Ltd on October 20, 2016 and subsequently progressed it into receivership on January 24, 2017. The bank was largely owned by tycoon Sudhir Ruparelia and his family.

“The Central Bank shall be the liquidator of CBL,” Mutebile said, adding: “All borrowers of CBL, whose loans were transferred to DFCU Bank under the purchase of assets and assumption of liabilities agreement between CBL (In Receivership) and DFCU Bank Ltd., must continue to service their loan obligations with DFCU Bank Ltd.”

However, legal experts have warned the Central Bank against liquidating Crane Bank, saying it’s illegal and could cost taxpayers more money.

SOURCE: Business Focus

 

Why Bank Of Uganda Is Rushing To Liquidate Crane Bank

Details have emerged why the Bank of Uganda on Friday November 13, 2020 announced that it had placed Crane Bank Limited (CBL) in receivership under liquidation and ordered the winding up of its affairs.

Winding up is the process where a company ceases operations, with liquidation being the stage where company assets are sold off to pay creditors.

In a statement, Prof. Emmanuel Tumusiime-Mutebile said the Central Bank is exercising its powers under section 99 (1) & (2) of the Financial Institutions Act, 2004.

It should be noted that BoU controversially took over management of Crane Bank Ltd on October 20, 2016 and subsequently progressed it into receivership on January 24, 2017. The bank was largely owned by tycoon Sudhir Ruparelia and his family.

“The Central Bank shall be the liquidator of CBL,” Mutebile says, adding: “All borrowers of CBL, whose loans were transferred to DFCU Bank under the purchase of assets and assumption of liabilities agreement between CBL (In Receivership) and DFCU Bank Ltd., must continue to service their loan obligations with DFCU Bank Ltd.”

Details

However, a leaked document by Margret K. Kasule, BoU’s Head of Legal Department to the Governor and his deputy reveals why the Central Bank is rushing to liquate and wind up Crane Bank.

Titled ‘Proposed Strategy on Crane Bank Appeal’, the leaked letter dated October 16, 2020, reveals that to stop tycoon Sudhir Ruparelia from reestablishing control over Crane Bank and avoid other potential suit cases, it was prudent for the Central Bank to wind up and liquidate Crane Bank.

“Given the attempts by Mr. Sudhir to re-establish control over Crane Bank which both Judges in the High Court and Court of Appeal stated not to exist, it is pertinent that we take the following steps before the hearings of both the Appeal and the Applications for stays and execution,” the document reads in part.

According to the letter, this is after Uganda Registration Services Bureau in a letter dated October 7, 2020 informed BoU of Sudhir’s intended filing submitted on his behalf in an attempt to reinstate himself and others as Directors of Crane Bank relying on the Judgment obtained from the Court of Appeal.

The letter adds that CLB should be liquidated “to ease the current impasse where legalistic arguments are being used to tie the hands of the Central Bank while attempts are being made to change the status-quo with the intention of rendering a favourable Supreme Court Ruling nugatory.

BoU also wants to be supported by the Attorney General in the Appeal case.

BoU Defeated Again

However, in a ruling dated November 9, 2020, Justice Paul Mugamba of the Supreme Court dismissed BoU’s case in which CBL (in receivership) filed an application against Sudhir and URSB seeking for an interim order preventing Sudhir from claiming, taking control, repossessing or in any way interfering with the management of CLB or of its receiver until the hearing and determination of Supreme Court Civil Application No.32 of 2020. The Application was dismissed with costs to Sudhir and URSB.

BoU was also seeking for an interim order preventing URSB from registering any resolutions in respect of the applicant/CBL until the hearing and determination of Supreme Court Application NO. 32 of 2020.

SOURCE: Business Focus

Court Rejects BoU Case To Stop Sudhir Takeover Of Crane Bank

The Supreme Court has dismissed the application in which Bank of Uganda (BoU) sought orders to stop property mogul Sudhir Ruparelia from repossessing his former Crane Bank, now under receivership.

Crane Bank in receivership had, in its application, stated that there was an imminent threat from Mr Ruparelia, who was seeking to take over its management again.

The BoU decision was based on two decrees issued by the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal in which the courts ruled that the bank ceased to be in receivership in January 2018.

The Central Bank was prompted by a January 28,2018, letter from Mr Ruparelia to Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB) .

Mr Ruparelia notified URSB that the receivership of Crane Bank ended on January 28, 2018 and the bank is no longer under receivership.

The businessman also stated that BoU was thus no longer has legal control over the closed commercial bank and that its board and shareholders are back in full control of it and its affairs.

However, Supreme Court judge dismissed BoU application on November 9.

Ruling

Justice Paul Mugamba ruled that there was no serious threat imposed by Mr Ruparelia to take over the control of Crane Bank in receivership since the bank was still under the control of BoU.

“I agree with counsel for the 1st respondent (Ruparelia) that the letter was simply informing the 2nd respondent (URSB) of what was decreed. The applicant in its submissions, contended that the applicant is still under receivership of the Bank of Uganda which had its property as well as the appeal,” Justice Mugamba ruled.

“I find no cause to doubt that the applicant (Crane Bank in receivership) and its property are in the hands of the statutory receiver (BoU) as clearly stated above.

Had the 1st respondent entertained intentions of taking its full control, he would have written to the receiver and not the 2nd respondent since the management, control and power of the applicant is in the hands of the receiver,” the judge added.

Justice Mugamba said given the circumstances cited above, there was no evidence for the court to rely on to grant Crane Bank an interim order stopping Ruparelia from retaking over control of the bank.

“I do not see the above letter written by the 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent, concerning the substance of the decree to be serious threat of execution before hearing of the pending substantive application,” Justice Mugamba said.

“Consequently, I dismiss this application with costs to the respondents (Ruparelia and URSB),” he ruled.

Background

On October 20, 2016, Crane Bank was closed and taken over by BoU as it was deemed under-capitalised.

The Central Bank sold Crane Bank with some of its assets and liabilities to dfcu Bank.

On June 30, 2017, Crane Bank filed a suit before the High Court seeking to recover over Shs397b from Ruparelia.

On August 29, 2019, presiding judge David Wangutusi dismissed the suit on grounds that Crane Bank had lost its legal powers to sue or be sued after it was placed under receivership.

Bank of Uganda appealed the ruling in the Court of Appeal, which also dismissed the appeal. Bank of Uganda further appealed the appellate court’s ruling in the Supreme Court.

The hearing of the appeal has been set for January next year.

SOURCE: Daily Monitor. FULL STORY HERE

Crane Bank Liquidation Illegal, Experts Weigh In On Matter

Bank of Uganda in a public notice has announced that that is has finalized plans to liquidate Crane Bank Limited (CBL) and ordered the winding up of its affairs. The regulator derives its power to liquidate CBL from section 99 (1) & (2) of the Financial Institutions Act, 2004.

The central bank also said that all borrowers of CBL must continue to service their loan obligations through DFCU Bank Ltd and Bank of Uganda while creditors of CBL will be notified of the procedure for presentation of their claims to the liquidator.

However, this move by the central is laughable and illegal, according to financial lawyers and experts who spoke to CEO Easy Africa, an online business publication.

“The powers of the Central Bank over banks is granted and governed by the Financial Institutions Act (FIA). It is not arbitrary. That Act sets out the powers and their limits and what the Central Bank can and cannot do. CBL was taken over by BOU in October 2016 and placed under statutory management.

In this status it continued running as a bank with its financial institution's license, but was governed not by its Board of Directors or Shareholders, but by a Statutory Manager appointed by Bank of Uganda,” said one commercial lawyer who asked not to be named for fear of retribution from the Central Bank.

“On January 18th 2017, CBL was closed as a bank (and it ceased to be a licensed bank) and was placed into Receivership by the Central Bank. It ceased to be a licensed financial institution when it was placed in receivership. All of this was within BOU’s power under the FIA, which allowed it to close the bank and to place it into receivership.

In both HCCS 493/2017 and Civil Appeal 252/2019, both filed by BOU to assert powers as Receiver of CBL, the High Court and the Court of Appeal both found that the Receivership of CBL ended 12 months after it commenced (i.e. January 2018),“ added another lawyer, that is familiar with the case.

“After this date when the courts of law determined that receivership had ended, BOU lost all legal authority over the affairs of CBL. It must be remembered that BOU’s authority is granted by the FIA and is limited by the FIA. Both the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal Courts found that under the FIA, BOU’s authority as Receiver of CBL ended in January 2018.

This means that after that date, BOU has no authority to make any decisions of any kind for CBL. Like at the end of all receiverships, the company is returned to its Board of Directors and Shareholders. After January 2018, CBL by law was supposed to return to its Board of Directors and Shareholders,” the lawyer said.

“The Judgments of the High Court and the Court of Appeal which state that Receivership ended are still in force and binding on all parties. They have never been stayed or set aside. BOU tried to stay the enforcement of the Judgment of the High Court in the Court of Appeal and lost that application.

BOU also tried to stay the enforcement of the Judgment of the Court of Appeal and lost that application in the Supreme Court. Both BOU’s attempts to stay were dismissed with costs against BOU. The current state of the law is that Receivership ended and BOU has no power or authority over the affairs of CBL,” the Commercial lawyers added.

Another female financial lawyer that CEO East Africa spoke to that also asked to remain anonymous so she could comment more objectively on the matter, said that BOU cannot move CBL into liquidation and attempts to do so were illegal. 

“Firstly, it (BoU) has no authority over CBL matters and all attempts to restore authority have been dismissed by both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court,” she said.

“The purported placing of CBL into liquidation is illegal and is an abuse of office by the Bank of Uganda. It is also an act of contempt of the Supreme Court in that there is a pending appeal before the Court and BOU is illegally trying to take matters into its own hands to circumvent a binding legal judgment by purporting to move CBL into liquidation.

Such a move will render the appeal they filed in the Supreme Court moot and violates the binding decision of the Court of Appeal that Receivership ended which has not been set aside or stayed by the Supreme Court. A receiver without authority cannot progress CBL from receivership to liquidation,” she said.

“CBL ceased to be a Financial Institution within the meaning of the FIA when its license to do banking business was taken away in January 2017 (when it was put under receivership). CBL has not been on the list of licensed financial institutions since then. BOU has powers under Section 99 of the FIA to place licensed financial institutions into liquidation.

But that power only applies to financial institutions, which are legally defined under Section 3 of the FIA to mean companies licensed to do financial institutions business. CBL has no such license as at November 13th 2020, and is therefore not a financial institution that BOU can place into liquidation today,” she said.

SOURCE: CEO East Africa

DPP Calls For Interdiction Of Equal Opportunities Commission’s Ntambi

The Director of Public Prosecutions Justice Jane Frances Abodo has directed that Equal Opportunities Commission chairperson Sylvia Muwebwa Ntambi must leave office immediately since she is still under investigations on criminal related charges until she is pronounced innocent by Court as the law stipulates.

The DPP ordered the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development Aggrey Kibenge to interdict Ntambi. The chairperson was last month jailed by Anti-Corruption Court over corruption.

She was granted bail on November 4 by the Grade One Magistrate Moses Nabende after depositing UGX. 3.5 million as cash bail, her passport and a land title with the court.

 Mr. Aggrey Kibenge, the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Gender now says in a November 9 letter to the Solicitor General Francis Atoke, that he was stuck with the DPP’s order because the Members of the Equal Opportunities Commission including the Chairperson are appointed the President.

“… If the above advice by the DPP stands, to seek your advice on who is the rightful officer to interdict Ms Sylvia Muwebwa Ntambi since she is an appointee of H.E the President,” Mr. Kibenge wrote.

The Solicitor General is yet to reply to the letter.

Ms Ntambi is jointly charged with her assistants at the Equal Opportunities Commission on abuse of office, corruption and conspiracy to defraud government more than 35 million shillings.

Her co-accused are; Agnes Enid Kamahoro, Moses Mugabe, Mpitsi Mujuni, Ronnie Kwesiga, Manasseh Kwihangana, Harriet Byangire, Evans Jjemba, Sarah Nassanga and Sunday Nicholas Olwor.

The prosecution alleges that Ntambi conspired with her assistants to steal money which they accessed by the virtue of the different offices they hold. The money was obtained between January and December 2018, as per diem for editing and drafting Equal Opportunities Commission HIV/AIDS workplace policy, yet none of the officials was reportedly entitled to it.

SOURCE: Trumpet News

 

Subscribe to this RSS feed

Kampala