Share
Uganda Vs Agade & Ors (Criminal Session Case No. 0001 of 2010) [2016] UGHCICD 2 (27 May 2016)
- Citation
- [2016] UGHCICD 2
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: International Crimes Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Owiny-Dollo, J
- Case number
- Criminal Session Case No. 0001 of 2010
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: International Crimes Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Owiny-Dollo, J
- Case number
- Criminal Session Case No. 0001 of 2010
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court determined that the offences of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, committed with premeditation and extreme brutality, warrant severe punishment to reflect societal condemnation and deter future crimes. However, the death penalty was deemed insufficient to provide closure or assuage the pain suffered by victims and society. Life imprisonment was imposed for the principal offenders, with lengthy concurrent sentences for others, balancing the gravity of the crimes with considerations of individual participation and potential for reform. For the accessory after the fact, the court recognized the lengthy remand period and statutory limits, opting for community service as a just and proportionate sentence.
Court disposition
Conviction and sentencing of all accused persons as per their respective offences.
Orders
- Hussein Hassan Agade, Idris Magondu, Issa Ahmed Luyima, Habib Suleiman Njoroge, and Mohamed Ali Mohamed are each sentenced to life imprisonment for terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, sentences to run concurrently.
- Hassan Haruna Luyima and Selemani Hijar Nyamandondo are each sentenced to 50 years imprisonment for terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, sentences to run concurrently.
- Muzafar Luyima is sentenced to one year of community service within Namasuba, four hours every two days per week, under supervision of LC officials and police.
- Registrar Criminal Division to summon LC Chairperson and DPC within fourteen days to effect release of Muzafar Luyima for community service; otherwise, he remains in prison until then.
02
Material facts
Parties
Uganda
Applicant Counsel: Mr. Lino AnguzuHussein Hassan Agade
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaIdris Magondu
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaIssa Ahmed Luyima
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaHassan Haruna Luyima
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaHabib Suleiman Njoroge
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaSelemani Hijar Nyamandondo
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaMohamed Ali Mohamed
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaMuzafar Luyima
Defendant Counsel: Caleb AlakaAmounts and remedies
- Number of Deceased Victims: 70
- Years Imprisonment for Two Convicts: UGX 50
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Session / Sentencing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
What is the appropriate sentence for the offences of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder committed by the convicted persons.
- 02
Should the death penalty be imposed for terrorism and murder in the circumstances of this case.
- 03
What sentence is appropriate for the convict found guilty of being an accessory after the fact.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- State Counsel Mr. Lino Anguzu argued for the imposition of the ultimate sentence, citing the gravity of terrorism and murder, the premeditated nature of the crimes, the brutality of the explosives used, and the widespread impact on victims, families, and society. He emphasized the need for deterrence and highlighted the political and religious motives behind the acts. For Muzafar Luyima, he acknowledged the lengthy remand period and the statutory maximum sentence, urging the court to consider these factors.
- Respondent
- Defence Counsel Caleb Alaka contended that none of the convicts originated the criminal plan but were manipulated by religious fanaticism. He pleaded for leniency, arguing that the convicts are young and capable of reform. He opposed the death penalty and urged the court to treat the convicts as victims of manipulation rather than as irredeemable offenders.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Uganda Penal Code Act; judicial sentencing guidelines
Sentencing for terrorism and murder must reflect the gravity of the offences, societal indignation, and the need for deterrence, but should also consider the possibility of reform and closure for victims.
- 02
Uganda Penal Code Act, Section on Accessory After the Fact
Maximum sentence for accessory after the fact is three years; time spent on remand must be considered in sentencing.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court determined that the offences of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, committed with premeditation and extreme brutality, warrant severe punishment to reflect societal condemnation and deter future crimes. However, the death penalty was deemed insufficient to provide closure or assuage the pain suffered by victims and society. Life imprisonment was imposed for the principal offenders, with lengthy concurrent sentences for others, balancing the gravity of the crimes with considerations of individual participation and potential for reform. For the accessory after the fact, the court recognized the lengthy remand period and statutory limits, opting for community service as a just and proportionate sentence.
Obiter and limits
- Terrorism targeting innocent civilians is most repugnant and cannot be justified by any cause.
- The pain and scars left on victims and society by such acts are indelible and cannot be erased by the death penalty.
- Among the victims may have been those opposed to the deployment of UPDF in Somalia, yet they suffered indiscriminately.
Court disposition
Conviction and sentencing of all accused persons as per their respective offences.
- Hussein Hassan Agade, Idris Magondu, Issa Ahmed Luyima, Habib Suleiman Njoroge, and Mohamed Ali Mohamed are each sentenced to life imprisonment for terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, sentences to run concurrently.
- Hassan Haruna Luyima and Selemani Hijar Nyamandondo are each sentenced to 50 years imprisonment for terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, sentences to run concurrently.
- Muzafar Luyima is sentenced to one year of community service within Namasuba, four hours every two days per week, under supervision of LC officials and police.
- Registrar Criminal Division to summon LC Chairperson and DPC within fourteen days to effect release of Muzafar Luyima for community service; otherwise, he remains in prison until then.
Source and reliance status
HC: International Crimes 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: International Crimes Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
INTERNATIONAL CRIMES DIVISION
CRIMINAL SESSION CASE No. 0001 OF 2010
(Arising from Nakawa Chief Magistrate’s Court Crim. Case No. 574 of 2010)
UGANDA ............................................................................................ PROSECUTOR
*VERSUS*
1. HUSSEIN HASSAN AGADE }{
2. IDRIS MAGONDU }{
3. ISSA AHMED LUYIMA }{
4. HASSAN HARUNA LUYIMA }{
5. ABUBAKARI BATEMETYO }{
6. YAHYA SULEIMAN MBUTHIA }{
7. HABIB SULEIMAN NJOROGE }{ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ACCUSED
8. OMAR AWADH OMAR }{
9. MOHAMED HAMID SULEIMAN }{
10. SELEMANI HIJAR NYAMANDONDO }{
11. MOHAMED ALI MOHAMED }{
12. DR. ISMAIL KALULE }{
13. MUZAFAR LUYIMA }{
BEFORE:- THE HON MR. JUSTICE ALFONSE CHIGAMOY OWINY – DOLLO
SENTENCE
After a protracted trial, I found Hussein Hassan Agade (A1), Idris Magondu (A2), Issa Ahmed Luyima (A3), Hassan Haruna Luyima (A4), Habib Suleiman Njoroge (A7), Selemani Hijar Nyamandondo (A10), and Mohamed Ali Mohamed (A11), each guilty under various counts, of committing the offences of terrorism, and murder, where over seventy persons lost their lives; and attempted murder, where numerous persons sustained grievous bodily injuries. I accordingly convicted them for each of the offences. I also found Muzafar Luyima (A13) guilty of two counts of the offence of being an accessory after the fact; and accordingly convicted him. The matter has now come up for sentence.
State Counsel Mr. Lino Anguzu urged Court to consider imposing the ultimate sentence for the offences of terrorism and murder for which the convicts are facing sentence. He submitted that society desires peace; hence, there is need for a sentence that would deter other members of society, by making them realise that terrorism and murder are risky undertakings, as the long arm of the law always catches up with whoever indulges in them. The reasons he gave for seeking the death penalty include the gravity of the offence of terrorism and murder; the motive behind the perpetration of the crime; the brutality of the weapon used, where here the explosives had maximum impact on the victims; the effect of the offence on the victims, their families, and the entire community at large.
He submitted that the commission of the crimes were premeditated with the result that lives were lost, numerous persons sustained severe injuries leading to maiming of some, and society itself is now living in a state of fear and unnecessary inconvenience as the State has to beef up security in all places; thus causing economic loss to the State. He pointed out that the motive for the criminal acts was both political and religious; and unless a severe sentence is imposed, society will continue to be at risk from these misguided radicals. As for Muzafar Luyima (A13), Counsel conceded that he has already been a remand prisoner for a period close to six years; and yet on conviction, the maximum sentence that Court could impose is three years. He thus urged Court to take this into consideration.
Defence Counsel Caleb Alaka focused his submission on the aspect of the fact that none of the convicts is really the originator of the evil design that concluded with the twin bombings; but were all brainwashed by religious fanaticism to commit the crimes for which they were found guilty and have been convicted. He therefore pleaded with the Court to treat the convicts with leniency as victims of manipulation themselves. He vehemently countered the submission for the ultimate punishment; and pointed out that all the convicts are in their thirties. He thus submitted that they can still reform and be of much better use to society if they are given the chance to do so.
I have to point out the indignation with which society views acts of terrorism in whatever form it takes. Terrorism, especially the one that is indiscriminately perpetrated, by targeting innocent and non–combatant members of society (the soft underbelly of society) is most repugnant; and cannot be justified by whatever cause, however seemingly compelling it may be. The hundreds of victims of these wanton acts had nothing to do with the decision to deploy the UPDF in Somalia. I daresay it is quite probable that amongst the victims of the bomb blasts were those who were irreconcilably opposed to the deployment; and yet because of these senseless and indiscriminate attacks they are either dead, or permanently living with the scars of these blameworthy deeds.
The grave crimes of terrorism, and murder, ruthlessly committed in the Kyadondo Rugby grounds and the Ethiopian Village Restaurant, must correspondingly attract severe punishments. I however do not believe that the death sentence would really assuage the victims and give closure to the indelible pain that society has suffered, on account of the terrorist and murderous acts. In the event, with regard to each of the counts in the offences of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder, Hussein Hassan Agade (A1), Idris Magondu (A2), Issa Ahmed Luyima (A3), Habib Suleiman Njoroge (A7), and Mohamed Ali Mohamed (A11), are each sentenced to life imprisonment. They will each spend the remainder of their lives in prison. In doing so, I have taken into consideration the centrality of their individual participation in these three crimes.
Hassan Haruna Luyima (A4), and Selemani Hijar Nyamandondo (A10), shall each spend 50 years in jail for each of the counts in the offences of terrorism, murder, and attempted murder for which they have been convicted. The sentences imposed on each of the convicts shall run concurrently. Muzafar Luyima (A13) has been in prison, on remand, for close to six years. The maximum sentence for the offence of being an accessory after the fact is three years. In the circumstances I find that it does not serve the interest of justice to keep him in jail any further. Accordingly, I sentence him to community service within his area of Namasuba; in which he will serve four hours every two days of the week, for one year.
This shall be at the supervision of the LC officials of his village, and the police. Accordingly then, the Registrar Criminal Division of the High Court shall within fourteen days of this order summon the LC Chairperson of Para Zone Namasuba, and the DPC for the Police station in charge of the area, to serve them with this order; and on which day Muzafar Luyima (A13) shall be released to them. Otherwise, he shall return to prison until then.

Alfonse Chigamoy Owiny – Dollo
JUDGE
27 – 05 – 2016
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.