The judge has been painstakingly dissecting the transaction. And he has at the end of the day, found the same to have been premised on fraud. And so, has declared it illegal and untenable. Ssekaana sits at the civil division of the High Court where, he serves as the boss. He practiced and taught law for years, before he was called to the bench. His judgments are regarded highly within the legal and judicial circles.

Uganda’s top firm of Muwema and Company advocates is the one which have been fighting to save Bitature’s string of properties. They have pulled off the laudable feat at the end of the day. This law firm has done such landmark cases previously. Those lawsuits have helped a great deal to rein in on banks and have saved businesses from being seized over fraudulent loans.  

For one example, the law firm is credited for having been the brain behind tycoon Ham Kiggundu’s landmark case. The lawsuit ended with the judge declaring the loan, which Kiggundu took from Diamond Trust Bank, to have been fraudulent. The judge made good remarks and observations which are a must read for the people transacting with the banks.

 As Bitature savors the victory, the South African loan sharks are, on the other hand, leaking their wounds. They have been pursuing the attachment of Bitature’s businesses, which plot, they have dismally lost. They lost the plot because it has been, and was as well, a fraudulent one from the word go.

In order to avoid detection, these loans sharks took cover under a vague thing known as Vantage Mezzanine Fund 11. This posture, as they are carrying out business outside South Africa. But first things first. We shall divulge later, how these loan sharks used their Vantage Fund to mislead Bitature into handing over his entire business empire to them!

Bitature is one of Uganda’s most hardworking tycoons. He has scrupulously built his empire from scrap. The empire now comprises of telecoms, energy, real estate, oil, and hotels, among others. Apart from business, Bitature wears many hats. He is the board chairman of many companies. Some of those companies include UMEME and UTAMU University. He is also a Consulate.

Bitature has been at pains of losing the hard-earned business empire above. This, following a loan he reportedly acquired from the South Africans in 2014. The loan sharks using one of Uganda’s renowned dodgy law firms, started off the foul game by tricking Bitature into writing a very dangerous agreement. 

Under such agreement, Bitature was convinced to surrender all his businesses for purposes of covering the fraudulent debt. Important to note, is the fact that many of the businesses Bitature used as securities to secure the loan, hadn’t agreed to the deal. They were merely dragged into the deal. And this, thanks to the trickery the loan sharks employed on Bitature, who, it would appear, required the loan as a matter of life and death.

Upon agreeing to hand over the businesses, the loan sharks made Bitature to write and sign transfer forms. This essentially meant, Bitature was kind of selling his properties to the money lenders. Yet he was simply taking a loan from them which he was supposed to pay back. This is how even loan sharks in Uganda operate! 

As would be expected, the South Africans would later on instruct their Ugandan lawyers to trot to the Uganda Business Registration Bureau (UBRS) and deceitfully demand that the transfer forms be altered in their favor! So keen on getting their unclean hands on Bitature’s properties they were, that they even hurriedly paid UGX1Bn fees to facilitate alternation of the same. Yet the same people had kept the deal away from the UBRS in the first instance. They did so in order to skip the mandatory legal process of registering in Uganda before doing business here. 

Operating as a partnership, they were legally enjoined to register with the UBRS. During this process, the South Africans would have been required to disclose their names and identities. But except in South Africa, they don’t operate like this elsewhere. They operate stealthily, to avoid rendering accountability in the event of committing fraud while doing business outside South Africa. They further engage in this kind of trickery in order to avoid paying relevant taxes to countries where they operate from.

The managers of URBS would prove too smart for the loan sharks to manipulate. They refused to change the ownership of the securities which Bitature had purportedly transferred in their names. The managers said they couldn’t do so because the transfer they were pursuing were a matter of contestation before Justice Boniface Wamala.

Much as Justice Ssekaana faulted URBS for pausing the alteration of the properties in absence of injunction order from court, the judge noted that the fact that the loan sharks had hidden the loan transaction from URBS, there was no way court could revisit the decision URBS took. Watch this space…

And among such deals is where the young city tycoon Hamis Kiggundu aka Ham, through his Ham Enterprises questionably acquired Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium before he mortgaged it to former Barclays Bank (now ABSA) at a staggering USD7M.

Trust the unrelenting corruption magnates in corridors of power, government recently announced its dire desire to amend the Stadium Trust Act 1953, for purposes of ‘improving its management’, which to our understanding, is an effort to legitimize the graft involved in its lease and in the process, save the current illegal proprietor and his creditors from the impending losses.

But this effort won’t be treaded on a steady ground. Two Ugandans have risen to have the public property preserved, protected and returned to its rightful owners, a development that will see the subdivided piece of land back to its former identity under the Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium Trustees.

George Nyanzi and Joseph Asiimwe have since sued Ham Enterprises, Trustees of Nakivubo War Memorial Trust, ABSA Bank Uganda Limited (former Barclays), Kampala District Land Board and the Commissioner of Land Registration. They contend that the suit property is “statutory property owned by Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium Trust and is protected as public property under Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy and Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda.”

Through their lawyers of Muwema and Company Advocates, Nyanzi and Asiimwe also want the lease given to Ham Enterprises by the Stadium Trustees, Kampala District and board and the Commissioner of Land Registration, to be cancelled along with the mortgage attached to it as anything to the contrary contravenes the constitution of the Land.

According to the existing law, its Nakivubo War Memorial Stadium Trust that is charged with administration, control and management of the Stadium property on behalf of Uganda Government. Their manning mandate include among others, land, buildings, monies, securities and all other properties vested in them.

They further pray for a permanent injunction restraining Ham Enterprises from developing and/or dealing with the Trust Property on the basis of the disputed lease granted by the Trustees. Section 8 of the Trust Act prohibits them from leasing or mortgaging the Property.

The Genesis

Information available indicate that around early this year, Ham allegedly aided a connivance between The Trust members, Kampala Land Board and the Commissioner of Land Registration to unlawfully create leasehold titles in his Company, Ham Enterprises’ favor. On March 4^th 2019, the racket reportedly colluded with the ABSA Bank to create a mortgage which resulted in issuance of the loan facility of USD7M to Ham.

The plaintiffs insist that the racket members created the Titles and authorized the mortgage arrangement in full knowledge of their felony. This is because in place, was the Solicitor General (SG’s) advice against the same. They went against previous legal advice given by the SG who had authorized a Public-Private agreement between Ham Enterprises and the Trust.”

“The 1^st (Ham Enterprises) and the 3^rd (ABSA Bank) Defendants designedly and deliberately entered into a mortgage agreement to secure borrowing of USD7000,000 knowing or having means to knowing that it was expressly prohibited under the law so as to procure an unlawful private benefit for themselves. The 2^nd Defendant intentionally and knowingly ignored the binding legal advice of the Solicitor General not to grant leases or allow the creation of mortgages over Trust Property.” Reads the plaint in part.

At the trial, the Plaintiffs will reportedly aver that Ham Enterprises did not acquire any proprietary right or interest in the suit property at all and that any such purported rights or interests are liable to be cancelled. This not only put Ham’s investment in a tricky position but also ABSA Bank mortgage stands in balance. Watch this space…