They were neighbours in Ggaba, Makindye, in Kampala. Christine Nagawa and Grant Mweteise operated retail shops that were next to each other. One day in February 2020, they quarrelled and threats were exchanged. A few days later, Mweteise’s shop caught fire. Witnesses claimed they had seen Nagawa near the scene of the fire.
Naggawa was charged with arson, and the case was heard at the Chief Magistrate’s Court in Makindye. After the prosecution presented eight witnesses, the magistrate, Sarah Anne Basemera, ruled on October 24, 2023, that there was “no case to answer”.
Nagawa was acquitted at that stage, prompting the state to appeal to the High Court.
The state’s appeal listed seven grounds, focusing on how the magistrate handled the evidence. The state argued that the magistrate Basemera failed to properly assess the prosecution’s case, including forensic evidence showing petrol-like substances at the scene, and wrongly called the evidence contradictory.
Prosecutors claimed the magistrate overstated inconsistencies in witness statements, such as where a suspicious bottle was found. The case relied on circumstantial evidence. Some witnesses said they saw Naggawa near the shop corridor shortly before smoke appeared. The state said the magistrate misapplied rules on identifying suspects and evaluating this type of evidence, which doesn’t involve direct eyewitnesses but builds a picture from surrounding facts.
A key point was whether the magistrate used the wrong benchmark for deciding if there was a “prima facie” case. The state also accused the magistrate of basing her decision on “non-existent facts” and saying the evidence was heavily weakened during cross-examination.
Justice Michael Elubu, who heard the appeal, agreed with the state on the standard of proof issue, noting the magistrate incorrectly required proof beyond a reasonable doubt too early. However, he rejected the other grounds, re-examining the evidence himself. He found no direct proof that Naggawa started the fire – witnesses only placed her nearby, which could be explained by her living there and using a shared public toilet in the corridor.
He said an alleged threat she made to Mweteise was not enough on its own, especially as one witness said the pair had reconciled. Justice Elubu cited past Ugandan cases, emphasising that suspicion alone, no matter how strong, cannot lead to a conviction, and circumstantial evidence must point irresistibly to guilt without reasonable alternatives.
In the end, Justice Elubu dismissed the appeal, confirming Nagawa was innocent. The ruling means the prosecution cannot retry Naggawa on these charges, as the acquittal stands. She is free.
