ODPP wants release of bioterrorist convict blocked, lower court ordered to produce key documents

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has filed an urgent application at the High Court seeking to block the release of a terror convict.

It also seeks to have a lower court compelled to transmit crucial documents necessary for the prosecution’s appeal.

In court papers, including an affidavit filed by prosecution counsel Marcellar Odero, the ODPP is asking the court to issue interim orders staying the release of Mohamed Ali, also known by aliases Abu Fidaa, Abu Shuhadaa and Abu Ramzi, pending the hearing of an appeal against his sentence. 

Ali was convicted in early 2024 and sentenced to 12 years in jail.

 Ali, his wife Nuseiba Hajji, alias Umm Fidaa; Abdirahman Hassan, alias Zakariya, and Salah Khalif, alias Salahudin, were charged with plotting to carry out a large-scale biological attack in the country using anthrax. 

When he was sentenced, he had already spent eight years in remand since his arrest in 2016 over terrorism-related activities.

Then 34 years, he was arrested at a medical facility in Wote, Makueni county, where he was working as an intern medic having completed his studies at the Kampala International University between 2010 and 2015.

The ODPP warns that such a release would significantly undermine the pending appeal and jeopardise national security.

The application also targets the delayed transmission of certified court proceedings from Milimani chief magistrate’s court, which has yet to furnish the High Court with key documents over a year after the prosecution filed the appeal.

The ODPP filed its appeal on April 30, 2024, citing seven substantive grounds, including concerns over acquittals and the handling of terrorism-related evidence.

Despite multiple formal requests dating back to April 2024 and follow-up letters by the High Court deputy registrar in May, June 2024, and again in June 2025, the magistrate’s court has not transmitted the full record, including the charge sheet, witness lists, exhibits and proceedings.

Odero argues that without the complete lower court record, the High Court cannot admit or schedule the appeal, thereby prejudicing the prosecution and frustrating the public’s interest in justice and accountability.

The affidavit also raises concerns that the fourth respondent, Salah Mohamed Khalif, who was acquitted, is seeking to leave the country—raising fears of flight risk and possible obstruction of justice.

“..while the 4th respondent [Salah Khalif alias Prince]—acquitted in the lower court—is actively seeking to leave the jurisdiction, raising real and credible concerns of flight risk and potential frustration of justice,” the documents read. 

The ODPP insists that the appeal touches on critical constitutional and security questions, and that preserving the current status—by keeping Ali in custody—is vital.

The prosecution maintains that no prejudice will be caused to the respondents if the orders are granted, as they are meant to safeguard the integrity of the judicial process while the matter is heard and determined.

Instant analysis:
This case underscores the ongoing challenges in prosecuting terrorism offences—where legal delays, procedural gaps and national security concerns collide with constitutional safeguards and due process.