The estates of the late Zura Mama Kasuku and Ahluwalia Gudo have become the focus of a petition that questions the integrity of Uganda’s justice system.
On July 16, 2026, members of the Wallia and Ahluwalia families appealed directly to President Yoweri Museveni, accusing Administrator General Manzi Victor and Justice Deepa Verma of misconduct.
What began as a family inheritance dispute has grown into a broader indictment of authority, alleging exclusion, manipulation, and abuse of office.
The petitioners — Bunny Wallia, Johnny Wallia, Ronnie Wallia, and Jassie Ahluwalia — opened with a blunt declaration: “We hereby lodge this legal complaint and request for urgent investigation into the alleged irregular, improper, unlawful and abusive conduct in the processing of the estates of the late Zura Mama Kasuku and the late Ahluwalia Gudo.”
Their words set the tone for accusations that officials manipulated procedures, excluded rightful heirs, and rushed decisions without consultation.
The irony is stark: those entrusted with justice are accused of orchestrating injustice.
At the center of their grievance is a family meeting held on June 12, 2026.
They write: “We were neither notified nor invited to the meeting, yet decisions purporting to bind the entire family were taken.”
The complainants argue this was no oversight but a deliberate attempt to sideline them. The next day, certificates of no objection were issued, which they describe as “suspiciously convenient.”
They add: “The issuance of certificates of no objection on June 15, 2026, without due consultation, demonstrates collusion and abuse of office.”
The petition further alleges that Administration Causes Nos. 599 and 600 of 2026 were filed before the High Court without informing them.
They insist: “We were deliberately kept in the dark, and filings were made before the High Court without informing us, the rightful beneficiaries.”
To them, this exclusion represents a denial of natural justice. They argue: “The Constitution of Uganda guarantees fairness, transparency, and accountability in public administration. What we have witnessed is the opposite: secrecy, manipulation, and abuse.”
The paradox is clear: a judge entrusted with justice is accused of denying it, while the Administrator General is accused of collusion.
The petitioners emphasize: “No one is above the law, and those who abuse their offices must face consequences.”
Their petition is supported by evidence, including a New Vision publication dated July 10, 2026, notices and applications in Administration Causes Nos. 599 and 600, files from Administrator General’s Causes Nos. 1258 of 2026 and 3460 of 2011, and documents establishing family relationships.
They state: “We shall rely on these documents to demonstrate the irregularities and improprieties complained of.”
Their requests to Museveni are sweeping: registration of the complaint, impartial investigation, examination of documents, disciplinary or criminal action, and a written response.
They write: “We request that this complaint be registered and investigated without delay, and that appropriate action be taken against those found culpable.”
The petition was copied to multiple offices, including the Deputy Chief Justice, the Head of Public Service, the Chief of Defence Forces, State House Legal Affairs, and the Anti‑Corruption Unit.
They explain: “We have copied this complaint to relevant offices to ensure transparency and accountability.”
The complainants allege the process was hijacked: “The process has been hijacked, and the estates of our loved ones are being mismanaged.”
Beyond property, they argue this reflects a broader abuse of public office.
They confess: “We have endured anguish and distress, watching our family heritage being dismantled through irregular and unlawful means.”
Their pleas, they say, have been ignored, their rights denied, and their heritage endangered.
They insist accountability is essential: “No one is above the law, and those who abuse their offices must face consequences.”
Signed collectively, the petition closes with: “We stand united in our demand for justice, and we shall pursue this matter until fairness is restored.”
The controversy illustrates wider concerns about transparency in Uganda’s judicial system. Their appeal is not only about inheritance but about the integrity of institutions.
They write: “We seek not only the protection of our family rights but also the preservation of the rule of law in our country.”
The case raises profound questions: how can those entrusted with justice be accused of denying it?
Their words highlight this paradox repeatedly.
They insist: “We shall not relent until justice is done and the truth is revealed.” Whether their appeal succeeds remains uncertain, but their determination is clear.
