The Court decision ordering Molly Katanga to defend herself regarding the murder of her husband has cleared the misinformation regarding the case.
Lawyers representing the family of the deceased businessman, Henry Katanga said that a lot of misleading information had been circulated to the public which the court had now put right.
Brian Kupper Rubaihayo, one of the family lawyers who helped the state to successfully lead its evidence said that there has been a lot of misinformation by bloggers and unprofessional journalists to mislead and shed a picture of innocence or otherwise of the accused persons.
“But you see, now the court has come out with the truth. We have seen in the media, DNA reports thrown out, which is not true. We thank the court for coming out to put the record straight and prove wrong the unprofessional people who have been misinforming the public about how the case has been progressing” he said soon after the court ruling.
According to the lawyer, the evidence so far received by the court is enough to compel the accused persons to say something about the murder case.
About the debate on gender-based violence and the secession that came with such cases, Rubaihayo insisted that it is largely the character of an individual.
On February 26, 2026, the High Court ruled that Molly Katanga, the two daughters, the shamba boy and the doctor have a case to answer.
Rubaihayo explained that prosecution ked its evidence implicating them in the murder of Katanga and destroying evidence relating to that murder case.
“The accused persons now have to defend themselves. They have to keep quiet about it, they have the right to bring evidence to prove that actually they have nothing to do with the murder. We are not starting another person process which is the defence case” he said.
Rubaihayo said that what awaits the accused persons now is to be assisted by their lawyers to bring evidence to disprove what prosecution presented against them.
Rubaihayo working with former Attorney General Senior counsel Mwesigwa Rukutana, Edgar Ayebazibwe and Ivy Patricia Muhumuza all from one of the leading law firms, Mwesigwa Rukutana and Company Advocates and were hired by Katanga’s family to be lawyers on watching brief to assist the prosecution in handling the case.
Rubaihayo explained that their role was to present the interest of the deceased’s mother and the relatives are catered for to achieve justice.
“I know that Parliament has not in place a substantive law on role of counsel on watching brief, I think it is high time that Parliament passed a law in that regard because we understand it is the role of the state to prosecute criminal cases but at the end of the day, the reality of the matter is there individuals and families who need justice” he said.
Justice Rosette Comfort Kania of the Criminal Division of High Court placed Molly Katanga on defence saying that prosecution lawyers provided to court evidence linking her to the murder of her husband and businessman Henry Katanga.
According to the judge, court found that prosecution has established sufficient evidence which Molly and other accused persons including her daughters Patricia Kakwanzi, Martha Nkwazi Katanga, family doctor Charles Otai and shamba boy George Amanyire who are charged with the offence of destroying evidence and being accessories after the fact of murder.
Judge Kania held that the circumstantial and forensic evidence presented by prosecution lawyers was sufficient to require the accused persons to defend themselves.
The judge noted that the forensic evidence presented by the acting police forensic director who testified that analysis of the suspected murder weapon revealed a mixed DNA profile of three accused individuals.
She noted that Molly’s DNA was found to be the most predominant on the trigger area of the pistol, the other profile matched the diseased, who was the registered owner of the gun, and Patricia Kakwanzi.
“Swabs taken from Molly’s palms tested positive for gunshot residue but the defence argued that such residues could transfer through secondary contact even though the court found that its presence sufficiently connected Molly to the shooting and required an explanation. ”
The medical evidence the prosecution presented shows that Molly had a cut on the tip of her small right finger which a doctor examined about seven days after the murder incident.
Molly’s conduct following her husband’s death was also considered by the judge based on the testimony of the witnesses who testified that when she was admitted at International Hospital Kampala (IHK), she declined to record a statement with police citing ill health.
The court has now set a day in March and April 2026 for hearing of the defence evidence
