Share
Bugembe v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 172 of 2024) [2024] UGHCCRD 50 (6 June 2024)
- Citation
- [2024] UGHCCRD 50
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Elubu, J
- Case number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application 172 of 2024
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Elubu, J
- Case number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application 172 of 2024
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicant had already been committed to the High Court for trial as per the court records (Session Case No. 303 of 2023). Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution provides for mandatory bail only if the accused has been on remand for 180 days before committal. Since the applicant was already committed, he no longer qualified for mandatory bail. The application was therefore dismissed as the constitutional threshold for mandatory bail was not met post-committal.
Court disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for mandatory bail is dismissed.
02
Material facts
Parties
Nyanzi Isma
ApplicantUganda
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Mandatory Bail
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the applicant qualifies for mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution after committal to the High Court.
- 02
Whether continued detention without bail is lawful after committal for trial on an offence triable only by the High Court.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that he has been on remand since 16th February 2021 without committal and is therefore entitled to mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution, as more than 180 days have elapsed.
- Respondent
- The respondent, relying on court records, contended that the applicant has already been committed to the High Court for trial (Session Case No. 303 of 2023) and therefore does not qualify for mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c).
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution of Uganda
Mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution applies only where the accused has been on remand for 180 days before committal to the High Court for trial.
- 02
Clause 10(1) and 10(3) of The Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2022
Only the High Court may grant mandatory bail for offences triable exclusively by it, and only if the committal has not yet occurred.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicant had already been committed to the High Court for trial as per the court records (Session Case No. 303 of 2023). Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution provides for mandatory bail only if the accused has been on remand for 180 days before committal. Since the applicant was already committed, he no longer qualified for mandatory bail. The application was therefore dismissed as the constitutional threshold for mandatory bail was not met post-committal.
Obiter and limits
- The provisions for mandatory bail are couched in mandatory terms, but their application is strictly limited to the period before committal to the High Court.
- The High Court alone has jurisdiction to grant mandatory bail for offences triable exclusively by it.
Court disposition
application dismissed
- The application for mandatory bail is dismissed.
Source and reliance status
HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
CRIMINAL MISC. APPL. No. 172 of 2024
BUGEMBE ALEX
$\begin{smallmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 &$
APPLICANT
Versus
UGANDA
$\begin{smallmatrix}&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&$ RESPONDENT
BEFORE: HON. MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ELUBU RULING
This application is commenced under Articles 23 (6) (a) and 28 (3) (a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda; Sections 14 (1) and 15 (1) (b) of the Trial on Indictments Act; and Clause 10 (1) of The Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2022
The applicant, Nyanzi Isma, seeks an order that he be released on mandatory bail.
The grounds on which the application is based are set out in the Notice of Motion and elaborated in affidavit sworn by the applicant.
He states that he was charged with the offence of Aggravated Robbery contrary to Sections 285 and 286 (2) of the Penal Code Act. That he was remanded ON THE
16<sup>TH</sup> of February 2021 and has remained in detention without committal. On this basis the applicant seeks a mandatory release on bail.
It has however been established from the court case management information system that the applicant was committed to the High Court and his High Court Session Case No. 303 of 2023. The matter was entered in the system on the 14<sup>th</sup> of June 2021.
Determination
This application is made on the premise that the applicant qualifies for mandatory bail. Because the applicant was charged with the offence of Aggravated Robbery contrary to Sections 285 and 286 (2) of the Penal Code Act, which is only triable by the High Court, then the relevant provision of the Constitution is Article 23 (6) (c) which states that,
Where a person is arrested in respect of a criminal offence in the case of an offence triable only by the High Court, if that person has been remanded in custody for one hundred and eighty days before the case is committed to the High Court, that person shall be released on bail on such conditions as the court considers reasonable.
Clause 10 (1) of The Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2022 reproduces the above article of the constitution.
This Court notes that the provisions are couched in mandatory terms.
The procedural provision is Clause 10 (3) of the above Guidelines which stipulates,
For the avoidance of doubt, mandatory release on bail for offences triable by the High Court under Article 23 (6) (c) of the Constitution shall be granted only by the High Court.
$\overline{2}$
I have perused the court record and checked with the court case database, and established that indeed, the applicant has been committed to the high court for his trial. The matter was entered in the court database as High Court Session Case No. 303 of 2023.
For release under Article 23 (6) (c) of the Constitution to be effected, the applicant should not have been committed to the High Court for trial. In view of the fact that he has now been committed, then he does not qualify for mandatory release on bail. For that reason, this application must fail and is dismissed.
Michael Elubu Judge 06.06.2024
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.