‎Soroti High Court rules out re-cross examination in Joan Faith Apio murder case

Osula Adong (front), together with Suzan Vivian Ariokot Okedi (standing behind), entering court for the hearing of their murder case. Soroti, Uganda | URN | The High Court in Soroti has rejected an application by a newly appointed defence lawyer seeking to recall two key prosecution witnesses for further cross-examination in the murder trial of seven-year-old Joan Faith Apio. Justice Boniface Wamala dismissed the application on Wednesday after ruling that the defence had failed to demonstrate any shortcomings in the earlier cross-examination conducted by the accused persons’ previous lawyers.

Police officer John Bosco Obotol, one of the six people on trial over Apio’s murder, appeared in court with a new lawyer, Muminu Magonu, who said he had been instructed to take over his defence. Obotol is jointly charged with school directors Joseph Okedi and Suzan Vivian Ariokot Okedi, headteacher James Edoket, school cook Valentine Opio and school matron Osula Adong over the killing of Apio, a Primary One pupil whose body was found in a pit latrine at Jozan Nursery and Primary School on February 5, 2025. Shortly after being introduced, Magonu asked the court to order disclosure of the trial proceedings and to recall two juvenile witnesses, who had earlier testified after being discharged by the court.

“Since I have joined the accused person today, I pray that the court be pleased to order pre-disclosure of the trial and also allow the prosecution witnesses, two of them, to be recalled for purposes of further cross-examination,” Magonu submitted. However, when asked by the prosecution to explain why the witnesses should be recalled, Magonu cited Section 146(4) of the Evidence Act, arguing that it gives the court discretion to permit witnesses to be recalled for further cross-examination. The prosecution challenged the submission, arguing that the cited provision did not confer such a right and accused the defence lawyer of misrepresenting the law before court.

Prosecutors further argued that Obotol had throughout the proceedings been represented by lawyers on state brief, including Francis Ajuun and Joseph Odong, and had actively consulted them during the trial without raising any complaint. They described the application as a tactic intended to delay the proceedings and argued that recalling the two juvenile witnesses would subject them to further trauma after they …