Police has taken up the case in which the powerful Forum for Democratic Change [FDC] secretary general, Nandala Mafabi, is accused of forging signatures to transfer a land title to his names and grab land in Mbale district.
Mafabi allegedly used his office and position to influence lands registry officials especially Commissioner Sarah Kulata to transfer his land tittles using ‘forged’ signatures.
The disputed land belongs to Steven Wobweni, the CEO and President of Tele Talk, a communications company based in South Africa.
It is situated at plot 4,Nakaloke Road, volume 391,FRV 29/5,Folio 21,Mbale Municipality near Islamic University in Uganda [IUIU], about 500 meters away.
Wobweni’s lawyers Candia Advocates & Legal Consultants advised him to slap criminal charges against Mafabi for forging signatures to dupe due process of acquiring land titles in Uganda.
On 29th January 2017, Wabweni wrote to the Director CID Grace Akullo seating at Kibuli Headquarters to investigate the fraud.
He asked the investigators to verify the signatures used in the transfer forms since he didn’t hand the transfer papers nor sign at the time of handing over the titles to Mafabi as a condition for borrowing Shs150m.
Police forensic report
The police signatures forensic report released on Monday May 29, 2017 confirms the signature was forged.
“I have carefully examined the questioned signatures in exhibits B and C and then compared them with the samples provided. The examination was carried out using specialised scientific methods such as VSC 5000 (video Spectral Comparison), sketching and visual observation method and the results as follows,” reads the report.
“I have observed fundamental differences between the questioned signatures in exhibits ‘B’and ‘C’ and the sample signatures jointly marked ‘A’. They are different in position of the introductory stroke, pen movement of strokes, direction of the ending strokes, relative size, shape, structure and simplicity.”
The report is signed by Sylvia Chelangat, the Forensic document examiner, at the police Headquarters at Naguru.
“Based on the observations made above in my opinion there is strong evidence to show that the author of the sample signatures in exhibits marked ‘A’ didn’t sign the questioned signatures in exhibits ‘B’ and ‘C’. This would mean that, all other conditions constant, the law can’t support a transaction carried out using forged documents and thus null and void,” the report added.