By Mulengera Reporters
The prosecution in the criminal case involving Miracle Centre Cathedral lead pastor, Robert Kayanja and nine young men accused of falsely accusing him of sodomy has been forced to retreat from its earlier challenge against a defense witness after the Uganda Medical and Dental Practitioners Council confirmed that Dr Phenehas Bwambale is professionally qualified to handle pathological conditions arising from sexual offences.
The development unfolded on Monday at Mwanga II Chief Magistrates Court in Mengo, where Chief Magistrate Adams Byarugaba ruled that Bwambale could proceed with his evidence after State prosecutor, Jonathan Muwaganya, told court that he had now received instructions allowing the doctor to testify.
But the proceedings happened without Bwambale himself in court.
The doctor had earlier informed court that he would be in Mombasa on Monday on another official engagement and had therefore sought to appear on September 7th.
The defense was consequently not ready to proceed with its evidence, with lawyer Humphrey Mwesigye informing court that he also had engagements outside the country and had requested to return on September 3.
Bwambale, a senior Police officer attached to the Police Training School in Kabalye, Masindi, is not an ordinary witness.
He appeared before court earlier as Defense Witness Number 10 after examining some of the accused persons who allege that they were sodomized by Kayanja.
He told court that he is a pathologist holding a Master of Medicine in Pathology, in addition to a Bachelor of Dental Surgery from Makerere University.
He also told court that his professional work involves diagnosing diseases, examining living and deceased persons and providing expert evidence in court.
It was his medical examination of some of the accused and the Police Form 3A documents arising from those examinations that triggered the latest confrontation between the defense and prosecution.
The prosecution, led by Chief State Attorney Jonathan Muwaganya, questioned whether Bwambale had the legal and professional capacity to conduct examinations relating to sexual offences.
The State’s argument was largely built around Bwambale’s foundational qualification in dentistry, with Muwaganya questioning whether he was appearing before court as a medical doctor, pathologist or dentist.
The defence, however, fought back, pointing out that the very medical forms completed and signed by Bwambale had been disclosed by the prosecution itself, questioning why Muwaganya was objecting the decision of the defence lawyers to cross-examine the witness about it.
The dispute became serious enough for Magistrate Byarugaba to write to the Uganda Medical and Dental Practitioners Council seeking an official determination on Bwambale’s competence.
And the answer from the professional regulator has now dealt a heavy blow to the prosecution’s objection.
The Council confirmed that Bwambale is professionally registered as a dentist and pathologist, stating that he obtained his Bachelor of Dental Surgery from Makerere University in 2014 and later obtained a Master of Medicine in Pathology from the same university in 2020.
The most important part of it was that the Council expressly stated that his Master of Medicine in Pathology mandates him to handle pathological conditions including those of sexual offense.
The response came after court specifically asked whether a person holding a Bachelor of Dental Surgery and a Master of Medicine in Pathology is competent to carry out medical-legal examinations of victims in sexual offence cases, including the accused boys who claim to he victims of Robert Kayanja’s sodomy acts.
Court also sought clarification on the professional category under which Bwambale practises after obtaining his postgraduate qualification.
With the regulatory body now confirming his competence, the prosecution on Monday informed court that it had obtained the necessary instructions and would no longer oppose Bwambale giving evidence.
Muwaganya, however, urged the defence lawyers not to use the matter to delay the trial, asking them to bring Bwambale and all their other witnesses so that the case can move forward.
But the defence could not proceed because Bwambale was away in Mombasa.
Court consequently adjourned the case to September 7.
Bwambale’s expected testimony comes against the background of a heated battle over medical and forensic evidence that has already dominated the trial.
Before the defence called Bwambale, court had heard from police digital forensic analyst Enock Kanene, who examined the phone of Reagan Ssentongo, one of the nine accused persons.
Kanene’s examination was ordered after Ssentongo told court that important evidence relating to his allegations against Kayanja was contained in his phone.
The police forensic expert subsequently presented a report containing WhatsApp chats, call logs, voice notes, photographs, videos and traces of deleted communication.
Kanene told court that his examination established communication between Ssentongo and Kayanja.
He further told court that pornographic photographs and videos had been exchanged and that some of the material on Ssentongo’s phone had been deleted but traces of transmission remained.
During cross-examination, Kanene was pressed by prosecutor Muwaganya over the fact that some of the explicit material was found on Ssentongo’s phone but similar material could not be traced as having been sent back from Kayanja’s side.
At one point, the prosecutor questioned whether the forensic expert could establish that deletions had originated from Kayanja’s phone rather than Ssentongo’s device.
The defence strongly challenged that line of questioning, insisting that the forensic findings had to be understood within the limits of what the expert could actually recover from the available device.
The controversy became even sharper when Kanene displayed traces of allegedly deleted WhatsApp videos before court but the actual files could not be opened or played because they failed to visualise.
Despite the technical difficulty, Kanene maintained that the forensic indicators showed that the files had existed and had been transmitted before deletion.
Ssentongo has since relied heavily on the forensic report in his own defence, taking court through messages, photographs and other sodomy related material which he says supports his account of his relationship with Kayanja.
The defence has therefore been fighting to ensure that evidence is not simply dismissed through Muwaganya’s objections but is placed before court and subjected to proper examination.
It is in that context that Bwambale’s evidence has assumed importance.
The doctor and police officer is expected to explain the medical examinations he conducted on some of the accused and the findings contained in the Police Form 3A documents.
And unlike the earlier forensic battle, where the prosecution challenged the interpretation of electronic evidence, the State’s latest objection concerned whether the person who conducted the medical examinations was professionally competent to do so in the first place.
That objection has now been substantially weakened by the Medical and Dental Practitioners Council’s own confirmation.
For the accused persons, the development means that another attempt to shut out potentially important defense evidence has failed, at least for now.
The case will return before Chief Magistrate Adams Byarugaba on September 7, when the defense is expected to proceed with its evidence and Dr. Bwambale is expected to take the witness stand again. (For comments on this story, get back to us on 0705579994 [WhatsApp line], 0779411734 & 041 4674611 or email us at mulengeranews@gmail.com).
