By Spy Uganda
Kampala: As we report this, it is a tough moment for Diamond Trust Bank (DTB) after its shoulder Bank of Uganda which it has been leaning on withdrawn from the fraudulent case between DTB and Uganda’s tycoon Hamis Kiggundu.
Taking you back a while, the Bank of Uganda had requested to become a friend of the court in this case in the guise of assisting court with information regarding the case’s neutrality and its proper handling.
However, this request was dust binned by the court and enfersised by Ham Enterprises LTD lawyers who informed the court that according to the earlier press release statement from Bank of Uganda after the High Court judgement on this case, it was evident that BOU was providing a shoulder for DTB to cry on meaning the same can not be considered as a neutral regulator.
As a result, therefore, the Court of Appeal asked the Bank of Uganda to clearly indicate their interest in this case by applying to become a party in the matter.
However, the latest we have established, BOU has dropped its interest in the case saying it is not interested in being added to the main suit as an interested party meaning troubled DTB is set to face furious Kiggundu’s pressure as a single entity.
The Bank of Uganda’s exit declaration from this case has been aired via its lawyer David Mpanga who revealed, “We have consulted our client regarding the court’s ruling. Our client has informed us that he is not willing/interested in being added to the suit as an interested party.”
Background Of The Case
Diamond Trust Bank (Uganda) and Diamond Trust Bank (Kenya) argued that Kiggundu received a credit facility totalling over shs41b a few years ago and he still owes them about shs39b. In turn, Kiggundu accused the banks of fraudulently siphoning over shs200b from his accounts without his knowledge and consent over the past 10 years.
The banks add that as of January 21, 2020, Kiggundu was in default on payment obligations of $6.298m on the loan facility of $6.663m, as well as sh2.885b on the demand overdraft facility of sh1.5b and the temporary demand overdraft facility of sh1b.
They further claim that Kiggundu was in default on the payment of another $3.662m out of a total loan facility of $4m and another $458,604 on a loan facility of $500,000, as of January 21, 2020.
However, Kiggundu revealed that this was a financial fraud since the money was fraudulently withdrawn from both his dollar and shilling accounts were in excess of what the bank was demanding. “They said they had carried out an audit of my bank accounts and discovered that the money was siphoned off over a period of 10 years,” Kiggundu said.
He highlighted that a total of sh29.035b was unlawfully debited from his shilling account, while $22.93m was withdrawn from his dollar account under what he calls unclear debits. Kiggundu, who has been accessing loan facilities from the bank for over 10 years, issued a notice to the bank terminating his relationship and withdrawing the mortgage instruments.