Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chief Court Writer
A UGANDAN couple, Robert and Sandie Kwesiga, have successfully overturned an unexplained wealth order issued against them by the High Court in Zimbabwe.
The Supreme Court, led by Justice Samuel Kudya, on Friday ruled in their favour, dismissing allegations of money laundering and setting aside the earlier judgment.
The dispute centred on two properties in Harare—one in Mount Pleasant valued at US$115 000 and another in Vainona valued at US$165 000.
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) had sought an unexplained wealth order, arguing that the couple’s known income was insufficient to justify the purchases.
The High Court granted the order in May last year, freezing the properties.
The Kwesigas, who lived in Zimbabwe between 2005 and 2013, through their lawyer Advocate Thabani Mpofu, instructed by Gill, Godlonton and Gerrans, contended that the properties were acquired legitimately.
Robert Kwesiga, a senior Danish Red Cross official, earned a diplomatic salary during his time in Zimbabwe.
They provided evidence, including bank statements and a property sale agreement from Uganda, to show they had sufficient resources.
Justice Kudya, delivering the Supreme Court’s judgment, criticised the NPA’s case, stating it lacked factual evidence to support its claims.
“The first respondent did not know nor ascertain the income of the appellants at the time the properties were acquired and transferred,” he said.
“The assertion that the appellants’ income was less than US$100 000 was plucked from thin air.”
The NPA, represented by K Mafute and Ms Mollyn Mutamangira, had based its application on a “tip-off” suggesting that Robert Kwesiga was involved in criminal activities during his time in Zimbabwe. It alleged that the properties were purchased using proceeds of crime.
However, the Supreme Court found the allegations to be unsubstantiated. “The suspicion must be based on objective facts,” Justice Kudya stated.
“What the first respondent presented was an inchoate or unparticularised suspicion or hunch from a tip-off and not specific and articulable facts upon which rational inferences could be drawn.”
The Supreme Court also noted that the High Court erred in rejecting the couple’s evidence on technical grounds, including a claim that documents from Uganda were unauthenticated.
Justice Kudya dismissed this reasoning, emphasising that the evidence provided by the Kwesigas was sufficient to explain the source of their wealth.
The judgment concluded that the requirements for an unexplained wealth order, as outlined in Zimbabwe’s Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act, had not been met.
“The court a quo (lower court) granted the application for an unexplained wealth order in circumstances where the cumulative requirements set out in section 37C of the Act were not met,” Kudya said.
The Supreme Court ruled that the unexplained wealth order be set aside and the NPA’s application dismissed with costs.
