By Cyprian Musoke
THE Parliamentary probe into allegations of extortion and blackmail against Lt. James Kinobe (Katikamu North), yesterday stalled when Kinobe’s lawyer, George Muwanguzi, failed to appear without giving prior notice to the committee.
This dealt the second blow to Kinobe’s defence, the first being the Thursday rejection by the committee of documentary evidence Muwanguzi had adduced in defence of his client.
The committee was yesterday meeting to hear the testimony of the accuser, Luweero Chief Administrative Officer Simon Mpiira Bigairwe, who appeared together with his lawyer, K. Turyakira of Turyakira and Company Advocates.
Muwanguzi’s absence did not go down well with the members of the rules, privileges and discipline committee who were hearing the matter. The MPs protested against the explanation that Muwanguzi was away for a court case which could take all day.
“Most of us are court members. Unless he (Muwanguzi) says he has two cases in court one being morning and the other afternoon, one case cannot be all day long. The witnesses have come from very far away and had other commitments as well,” George Ruhindi (Nakawa), said.
But Kinobe maintained that on communicating with Muwanguzi, he told him that he could not tell when the case would end and when he would be able to appear.
“I asked the same question and he said, he is not in control of the court. He said rather than speculating, if it is well with you, let the committee adjourn till Tuesday,” Kinobe replied.
At one point, when one of the accused, Apollo Ofwono (Tororo), asked Mpiira why he wanted to finish ‘us’, Mpiira said, “No. It’s him I want,” pointing at Kinobe.
Committee chairman Ben Wacha said when lawyers are committing themselves, they first check their diaries, so Muwanguzi should have known his schedule.
Ends