Share
Uganda v John Peter Akiize (Revision Order No. 36/90) [1991] UGHC 78 (7 August 1991)
- Citation
- [1991] UGHC 78
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Okello, J
- Case number
- Revision Order No. 36/90
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court of Uganda
- Panel
- Okello, J
- Case number
- Revision Order No. 36/90
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Penal Code Amendment Statute No. 5 of 1987, which increased the minimum sentence for offences under section 257 of the Penal Code Act to three years, came into force on 30 June 1987. John Peter Akiize was convicted and sentenced on 12 May 1987, prior to the commencement of the amendment. Therefore, the amended minimum sentence did not apply to his case. The trial magistrate acted within the law as it stood at the time, and the sentence of 18 months imprisonment was lawful. There was no illegality in the conviction or sentence, and no revision order was necessary.
Court disposition
no revision order necessary; conviction and sentence confirmed
Orders
- No revision order is made.
- File to be returned to Gulu Chief Magistrates Court for retention.
02
Material facts
Parties
Uganda
Applicant Counsel: Edward Wandera, State AttorneyJohn Peter Akiize
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Revision / Revision Order
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the sentence imposed on John Peter Akiize was illegal in light of the Penal Code Amendment Statute No. 5 of 1987.
- 02
Whether the amended minimum sentence applied to the accused at the time of conviction and sentencing.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The Chief Magistrate of Gulu and the DPP argued that the sentence of 18 months imprisonment was illegal because the Penal Code Amendment Statute No. 5 of 1987 set a minimum sentence of three years for offences under section 257 of the Penal Code Act. They contended that the imposed sentence was contrary to the amended law and sought a revision order.
- Respondent
- John Peter Akiize did not make submissions, but the record shows he pleaded guilty and was sentenced before the commencement date of the Penal Code Amendment Statute No. 5 of 1987. The trial magistrate had authority under the law as it stood at the time of conviction and sentencing.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Penal Code Act; Penal Code Amendment Statute No. 5 of 1987
A statute does not operate retrospectively unless expressly stated; sentencing must be in accordance with the law in force at the time of conviction.
- 02
Criminal Procedure principles
The court must ensure that the conviction is proper and the plea unequivocal before confirming the sentence.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Penal Code Amendment Statute No. 5 of 1987, which increased the minimum sentence for offences under section 257 of the Penal Code Act to three years, came into force on 30 June 1987. John Peter Akiize was convicted and sentenced on 12 May 1987, prior to the commencement of the amendment. Therefore, the amended minimum sentence did not apply to his case. The trial magistrate acted within the law as it stood at the time, and the sentence of 18 months imprisonment was lawful. There was no illegality in the conviction or sentence, and no revision order was necessary.
Obiter and limits
- The file is to be returned to Gulu Chief Magistrates Court for retention.
- The plea upon which the conviction is based was unequivocal.
Court disposition
no revision order necessary; conviction and sentence confirmed
- No revision order is made.
- File to be returned to Gulu Chief Magistrates Court for retention.
Source and reliance status
High Court of 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.
High Court of Uganda
Judgment
The Hon. Mr. Justice F. M. S. Egond. Ntende
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA REVISION ORDER NO. $36/90$
PROSECUTOR :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: UGANDA
VERSUS
ACCUSED :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: JOHN PETER AKIIZE BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice G. M. Okello:
REVISION ORDER:
John Peter Akiize was employed in the public service as an Engineering Assistant. On or about the 7th day of March 1987 he was in charge of Water Development Section in Gulu. He was responsible for the keys to the store of that section.
He and three others were jointly charged with stealing by a person in the Public Service of various items from the store of Water Development section Gulu contrary to sections 252 and 257 of the Penal Code Act. John Peter Aklize pleaded guilty to the charge and he was convicted on his own plea. The other three accuseds pleaded not guilty to the charge. Hohn Peter Akiize was subsequently sentenced to 18 (Eighteen) months imprisonment.
The Chief Magistrate of Gulu forwarded the record of the proceeding in this file to this court for a possible revision order on the ground that the minimum sentence provided under the amendment to 257 of the Penal Code act is three years imprisonment. That the imposed sentence of 18 months imprisonment / militates against the amended section 257 of the Penal Code Act
and therefore illegal.
When the reord of theproceedings was sent to the DPP for his views, Edward Wandera a State Attorney who wrote the opinion of the DPP in his letter ref.6/4/2 of 18/7/91 shared the view of the Learned Chief Magistrate and did not wish to be heard in the event of a revisional order being made.
The Penal Code Amendment Statute $\text{No}_\bullet\text{5}$ of 1987 which came into effect on 30.6.87 stipulates the minimum sentence for offence under sections 257, 258, 258 A and 259 of the Penal Code Act to three years imprisonment but not exceeding 14 years.
Jchn Peter Akiize was convicted on his own plea of guilty of the offence under section 257 of the Penal Code Act on 12/5/87 and was sentenced as stated above. The conviction and sentence of this accused was clearly imposed before the Penal Code Amendment Statute No 5/87 came into force. The commencement date of the Statute is $30/6/87$ . It was thereforenot applicable to that case. The trial Magistrate therefore had authority to pass the sentence which he did.
As the conviction is proper, the plea upon which it is based being unequivocal,/the sentence being in accordance with the law, no revision order is found necessary. The file is to be returned to Gulu Chief Magistrates Court. for retention.
G. M. Okello
$\cdots \cdots$
JUDGE. $7/8/91.$
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.