Uganda Case Law

Uganda v Nsamba & 3 Others

Uganda v Nsamba & 3 Others (Criminal Session 245 of 2024) [2025] UGHC 51 (31 January 2025)

Court

High Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Session 245 of 2024

Judge

Karemani Jamson K, J

The court found that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the deaths of Natukunda Asina, Ayebale Nusura, and Mutesi Shurat, that the deaths were unlawful, and that they were caused with malice aforethought. The evidence against Ssonko Samuel Muganga (A3) consisted of credible accomplice testimony from Nsamba John (A1/PW6), corroborated by post mortem reports and other witness accounts. The court warned itself of the dangers of relying on accomplice evidence and found sufficient corroboration in the physical evidence and consistency of PW6's testimony. There was no credible evidence…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Malice Aforethought
• Accomplice Evidence
• Burden Of Proof
• Corroboration
• Unlawful Homicide

Turyatemba v Uganda

Turyatemba v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 255 of 2019) [2024] UGCA 281 (4 October 2024)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 255 of 2019

Judge

Cheborion-Barishaki, JA, Obura, JA, Luswata, JA

The Court of Appeal upheld Turyatemba Gad’s convictions for murder and aggravated robbery, but set aside the original sentence and imposed fresh concurrent terms.

• Murder
• Aggravated Robbery
• Accomplice Evidence
• Sentencing Principles
• Corroboration
• Circumstantial Evidence

Uganda v Kasolo and 5 Others

Uganda v Kasolo and 5 Others (Criminal Case 571 of 2020) [2023] UGHCCRD 148 (19 October 2023)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Case 571 of 2020

Judge

Muwata, J

The court found that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Kasolo Coporiyamu (A1), Lubega Johnson (A2), Kalyango Nasif (A3), Kiseka Hassan (A4), and Mpanga Sharif (A5) jointly participated in the kidnap, murder, and aggravated robbery of Nagirinya Maria Gateni and Kitayimbwa Ronald. The evidence included direct testimony from an accomplice (PW9), corroborated by forensic evidence, postmortem reports, call data analysis, confessions, and scene reconstruction. The court held that the alibi defenses were false and unsupported, and that the accused acted with common intention. The d…

Source excerpt

• Kidnap With Intent To Murder
• Murder
• Aggravated Robbery
• Common Intention
• Burden Of Proof
• Accomplice Evidence

Uganda v Mugabe and 5 Others

Uganda v Mugabe and 5 Others (Criminal Session Case 485 of 2018) [2022] UGHCCRD 115 (2 November 2022)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Session Case 485 of 2018

Judge

Elubu, J

The court found that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Nabwanika Rehema Halima was unlawfully killed with malice aforethought and that she was kidnapped with intent to murder. The confessions of A1 and A2, corroborated by physical evidence and video reconstruction, established the participation of Mugabe Kamada Shakur, Olo John Bosco, Dumba Ali Salongo Kyagulanyi Sembajja, Kaaya Brian, and Lukwago Herbert in both offences. The court applied the principles of corroboration for accomplice evidence and found sufficient independent facts supporting the confessions. The defence a…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Kidnap With Intent To Murder
• Accomplice Evidence
• Confession Statements
• Burden Of Proof
• Corroboration

Bedi v Uganda

Bedi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 41 of 2021) [2021] UGHCCRD 80 (27 December 2021)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Appeal 41 of 2021

Judge

Elubu, J

The High Court dismissed Bedi Joseph’s appeal, upholding his conviction and one-year sentence for forging or counterfeiting a trademark under section 71 of the Trademarks Act.

• Forgery Of Trademark
• Counterfeiting
• Intent To Defraud
• Accomplice Evidence
• Sentencing Principles
• Trademark-forgery

Kajubi v Uganda

Kajubi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 20 of 2014) [2021] UGSC 45 (12 November 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 20 of 2014

Judge

Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Opio Aweri, JSC, Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC, Tuhaise, JSC

The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal properly evaluated the evidence, correctly applied the law on contradictions and accomplice testimony, and was justified in relying on the credible portions of PW7 and PW8's evidence, which was corroborated by phone records and the appellant's conduct. The defense of alibi was disproved by evidence placing the appellant in Masaka at the material time. The sentence of life imprisonment was lawful, proportionate to the gravity of the crime, and consistent with sentencing principles, with no failure to consider mitigating factors or time spent on…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Accomplice Evidence
• Corroboration
• Contradictory Testimony
• Sentencing Principles
• Defense Of Alibi

Atugonza & 4 Others v Uganda

Atugonza & 4 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 11 of 2018) [2021] UGSC 5 (6 October 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 11 of 2018

Judge

Arach-Amoko, JSC, Opio-Aweri, JSC, Mwondha, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC

The Supreme Court of Uganda dismissed the appeal, upholding murder convictions and a rape conviction for Byaruhanga David, together with life sentences.

• Murder
• Rape
• Accomplice Evidence
• Alibi
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Sentencing Guidelines

Mugisha Vs Uganda

Mugisha Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 104 of 2011) [2019] UGCA 149 (17 June 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 104 of 2011

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge erred in several respects: (1) by calling a court witness after both prosecution and defence had closed their cases and allowing the prosecution to lead the witness, which amounted to reopening the prosecution case and prejudiced the appellant; (2) by convicting the appellant for neglect of duty based on the actions of a junior officer, thereby improperly applying vicarious liability and failing to establish the required mens rea for criminal liability; (3) by relying on the uncorroborated and inconsistent testimony of an accomplice (PW1), contra…

Source excerpt

• Neglect Of Duty
• Mens Rea
• Vicarious Liability
• Accomplice Evidence
• Procedural Irregularities
• Corroboration Requirements

Ayesiga Vs Uganda

Ayesiga Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 0294 of 2015) [2019] UGCA 148 (13 June 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 0294 of 2015

The Court of Appeal held that the absence of a handwriting expert's opinion on the contested documents (Exhibit P.32 and Receipt No. 077) was not fatal to the conviction, as the court is empowered to make findings on handwriting based on other corroborative evidence. The appellate Judge was justified in relying on the evidence of DW1, as there was no indication that DW1 was an accomplice, and his testimony was corroborated by other prosecution witnesses. The court found that the evaluation of evidence by the appellate Judge was proper, including the treatment of contradictions in official rep…

Source excerpt

• Abuse Of Office
• Causing Financial Loss
• Evidence Act Application
• Documentary Evidence
• Accomplice Evidence
• Judicial Review Of Facts

Odong & 2 Ors Vs Uganda

Odong & 2 Ors Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 0079 of 2017) [2019] UGCA 21 (4 April 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 0079 of 2017

The Court of Appeal quashed aggravated robbery convictions, finding the prosecution failed to prove theft and use of a substance to render victims unconscious.

• Aggravated Robbery
• Burden Of Proof
• Corroboration
• Accomplice Evidence
• Sentencing Principles
• Elements Of Offence