The High Court has ruled that Christopher Okello Onyum has a case to answer, marking a significant turning point in the high-profile Ggaba daycare murder trial that has gripped the public for weeks.
The ruling follows the close of the prosecution’s case, in which state attorneys presented a total of 18 witnesses in a bid to link Okello to the gruesome killing of four toddlers at a daycare centre in Ggaba, a Kampala suburb.
Trial judge Justice Alice Komuhangi Khauka determined that the evidence on record meets the legal threshold requiring the accused to respond to the charges.
During proceedings, Justice Komuhangi Khauka engaged the accused directly after delivering the ruling, seeking confirmation that he understood its implications.
“Mr Okello, do you understand what that means? If yes, what do you understand?” the judge asked.
Okello responded that he understood the court’s finding.
“I understand that prosecution has convinced court that I have a case to answer,” he said.
In criminal law, a ruling of “case to answer” means the prosecution has established a prima facie case—sufficient evidence that, if not rebutted, could lead to a conviction. The burden now shifts to the defence to respond to the allegations.
Okello has been granted 30 minutes to consult with his legal team before indicating how he intends to proceed. He may choose to give sworn or unsworn testimony, call witnesses, or remain silent, though the latter carries legal implications.
The trial has attracted widespread public attention due to the nature of the allegations and the circumstances surrounding the proceedings.
Earlier hearings were briefly disrupted by severe weather, including a violent hailstorm that damaged court tents and forced a temporary suspension of sessions.
Throughout the trial, prosecution relied heavily on digital forensic analysis, CCTV footage, and witness testimony. Investigators presented phone records and online activity allegedly linked to the accused, while also acknowledging gaps in surveillance coverage due to a reported power outage on the day of the incident.
The case has also sparked legal debate around the use of the insanity defence, with commentators questioning whether the accused was mentally fit at the time of the alleged offences.
The trial now proceeds to the defence phase, where Okello is expected to respond to the evidence presented against him.