Download

Uganda Judgment

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Sserubula v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application 320 of 2023) [2024] UGHCCRD 21 (13 March 2024)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The applicant was charged with murder, an offence triable only by the High Court, and has been on remand since February 9, 2023. The 180-day period required for mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution elapsed in August 2023. The respondent failed to provide evidence of committal to the High Court, and submissions alone do not constitute proof. The applicant presented three sureties with satisfactory documentation. The court found that the applicant met the constitutional threshold for mandatory bail, and the objections raised by the respondent regarding the applicant's residence and sureties were not substantiated by sufficient evidence. Accordingly, the applicant qualifies for mandatory release on bail, subject to reasonable conditions imposed by the court.

Court disposition

application granted; applicant released on mandatory bail

Orders

  • The applicant shall execute a bond of 1,000,000 UGX (one million shillings) not cash.
  • Each surety is bonded in the sum of 5,000,000 UGX (five million shillings) not cash.
  • The applicant shall report to the Chief Magistrate of the Natete-Rubaga Court every first Monday of the month.
  • The applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior notification to the officer in charge at Natete Police.

02

Material facts

Parties

Sserubula Brian alias Sserubwama

Applicant

Uganda

Respondent Counsel: Adong Harriet

Amounts and remedies

  • Applicant Bond Amount: UGX 1,000,000
  • Each Surety Bond Amount: UGX 5,000,000

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Bail Application / Ruling on Application for Mandatory Bail Pending Trial

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicant argued that he has been on remand since February 9, 2023, exceeding the 180 days required for mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution. He asserted his right to bail, presumption of innocence, lack of intent to abscond, and presented three sureties with supporting documentation. He claimed no likelihood of interfering with investigations or witnesses and undertook to comply with all bail conditions.
Respondent
The respondent opposed the application, arguing that the applicant is charged with a serious offence (murder) carrying a maximum sentence of death. The respondent contended that the applicant failed to prove a fixed place of abode, that the sureties are not substantial, and that the applicant may abscond or interfere with witnesses. The respondent asserted that it is in the interest of justice to deny bail.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution of Uganda, 1995

    A person charged with an offence triable only by the High Court who has been on remand for 180 days before committal is entitled to mandatory bail.

  2. 02

    Guideline 10, Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2022

    Mandatory bail for offences triable by the High Court is regulated by Guideline 10 of the Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2022.

  3. 03

    General principle of evidence

    Submissions by counsel are not evidence; the court is moved by proof of factual allegations.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The applicant was charged with murder, an offence triable only by the High Court, and has been on remand since February 9, 2023. The 180-day period required for mandatory bail under Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution elapsed in August 2023. The respondent failed to provide evidence of committal to the High Court, and submissions alone do not constitute proof. The applicant presented three sureties with satisfactory documentation. The court found that the applicant met the constitutional threshold for mandatory bail, and the objections raised by the respondent regarding the applicant's residence and sureties were not substantiated by sufficient evidence. Accordingly, the applicant qualifies for mandatory release on bail, subject to reasonable conditions imposed by the court.

Obiter and limits

  • Submissions are not evidence; the court is moved by proof of factual allegations.
  • Mandatory release on bail for offences triable by the High Court under Article 23(6)(c) is granted only by the High Court.

Court disposition

application granted; applicant released on mandatory bail

  • The applicant shall execute a bond of 1,000,000 UGX (one million shillings) not cash.
  • Each surety is bonded in the sum of 5,000,000 UGX (five million shillings) not cash.
  • The applicant shall report to the Chief Magistrate of the Natete-Rubaga Court every first Monday of the month.
  • The applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the court without prior notification to the officer in charge at Natete Police.

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.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Judgment

[2024] UGHCCRD 21

![](_page_0_Picture_0.jpeg)

SSERUBULA BRIAN alias SSERUBWAMA

APPLICANT

VERSUS

UGANDA

RESPONDENT

BEFORE: HON. MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ELUBU RULING

This Application is commenced under Articles $23(6)$ , $28(3)(a)$ and $139(1)$ of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995; Section 40(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code Act, Cap. 116; Sections 14 of the Trial on Indictment Act Cap. 23; Rule 2 of the Judicature (Criminal Procedure) Application Rules SI 13-8 and The Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2022.

The Applicant, Sserubula Brian alias Sserubwama, seeks an order that Mandatory Bail be granted pending his trial in the High Court.

The Application is premised on the grounds set out in the Notice of Motion and further particularized in the supporting affidavit deposed by the Applicant.

The Applicant deposed that he is 31 years of age and a resident of Kisigula village Cell Mutundwe Ward, Gombolola Ssabagabo Makindye-Wakiso District. That on the 22<sup>nd</sup> day of January 2023, he was detained at Natete Police Station for over two weeks. Later, on the 9<sup>th</sup> day of February 2023, the Applicant was produced before the Natete-Rubaga Court, and charged with Murder Contrary to Sections 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act. The Applicant was then remanded in Luzira Prison where he has been to date. That he is aware he has a fundamental and constitutional right to apply for bail. That he is presumed innocent until proven guilty or until he pleads guilty. In this case, the Applicant does not intend to plead guilty. That he is a young man who is innocently in custody and being unfairly detained without trial. The Applicant avers that he intends to appear in Court at all times to attend his trial in order to clear his name of any charges levelled against him. That the Applicant does not have any other pending criminal charges against him. That the Applicant has sound and substantial sureties living within the jurisdiction of the Court who have undertaken to ensure that he complies with the conditions of the bail. That there is no likelihood of the Applicant interfering with investigations or witnesses. He states that this Court has wide discretionary powers to release him on bail, as the offence is bailable by this Court. That he shall abide by all the bail conditions imposed upon him by the Court and that shall not abscond once released on bail. Lastly, that it is only fair, just, constitutional and in the best interest of justice that the Applicant be granted bail pending his trial.

The State opposes this Application. In an affidavit in reply deposed by Adong Harriet, a Senior State Attorney in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, it is stated that the Applicant is charged with a serious offence of Murder Contrary to ss 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act and the offence carries a maximum sentence of death. That the Applicant has been committed for trial. The respondent avers that the Applicant failed to prove that he has a fixed place of abode within Kisigula village cell, Mutundwe Ward, Gombolola Ssabagabo Makindye Wakiso District. The evidence of address of residence provided is merely temporary. That once released on bail, the Applicant will abscond. Further, that the sureties presented

by the Applicant are not substantial. They failed to prove that they have a fixed place of abode. That the Applicant will interfere with prosecution witnesses since they are known to him. Lastly, that it is fair and in the interest of justice that the Application be denied.

Submissions

The Respondent filed written submissions. These have been carefully studied and utilized in the determination of this Application.

Determination.

Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 and Guideline 10 of the Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of judicature)(Practice) Directions, 2022 are the provisions of law that regulate the grant of mandatory bail by the High Court in offences triable only by the High Court.

Although the respondent stated that the applicant was committed to the High Court for trial, there is no record of such committal proceedings, nor has the respondent produced any other proof of committal. It is trite law that submissions are not evidence. The court is moved by proof of factual allegations. In those circumstances, this court will treat this as a matter where the applicant has not been committed to the High court for trial.

Article 23 (6) (c) of the Constitution, stipulates as follows:

Where a person is arrested in respect of a criminal offence-

a) $\ldots$

b) $...$

c) in the case of an offence triable only by the High Court, if that person has been remand 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.

Guideline 10 of the Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2022, provides:

- 1) Where an offence is triable only by the High Court, if a person has been remanded in custody in respect of that offence 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. - 2) In the case of a person who has been on remand for one hundred and eighty days in accordance with Article 23(6)(c) of the Constitution, the Magistrate's Court shall immediately refer the file to the High Court. - 3) 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.

The Applicant was charged at the Nateete-Rubaga Court on the 9<sup>th</sup> of February 2023. He has been on remand to date. The One hundred and eighty days specified in Art 23 (6) (c) elapsed in August 2023.

In the result the applicant here qualifies for a mandatory release on bail. He states that he has three sureties: Namutibe Ruth; Batte Kigongo Saulo and Nakabazi immaculate. The introduction letters of the sureties, from local Council authorities,

$\overline{4}$

and Photostat copies of National Identity Cards have been produced. I have studied the same and I find them satisfactory.

Having weighed both sides in this matter, it is ordered that the Applicant be granted a mandatory release on bail in the following terms:

- 1. The Applicant shall execute of 1,000,000/- (one million shillings) NOT CASH. - 2. Each surety is bonded in the sum of 5,000,000/- (Five million shillings) not cash. - 3. The Applicant shall report to the Chief Magistrate of the Natete-Rubaga Court every first Monday of the month. - 4. The Applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Court without prior notification being given to the officer in Charge Police Sitting at Natete

Michael Elubu Judge 13.03.2024

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 Article 23(6)(c)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Criminal Procedure Code Act, Cap. 116 Section 40(2)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Trial on Indictment Act Cap. 23 Section 14

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Judicature (Criminal Procedure) Application Rules SI 13-8

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2022 Guideline 10

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.