Uganda Case Law

Mawazi v Uganda

Mawazi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 43 of 2018) [2021] UGSC 33 (17 February 2021)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 43 of 2018

Judge

Owiny-Dollo, CJ, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Mugamba, JSC, Muhanguzi, JSC, Mike Chibita, JSC

The Supreme Court found that the trial judge and Court of Appeal properly admitted and relied on the confessions of A4 and A7, having conducted trials within a trial and cautioned themselves as required by law. The confessions were corroborated by independent evidence, including the recovery of murder weapons and blood-stained clothes linked to the appellants and the deceased. The circumstantial evidence, when considered as a whole, was overwhelming and excluded any reasonable hypothesis other than the guilt of the appellants. The defence of alibi was not credible, as prosecution evidence pla…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Confessions
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Sentencing
• Alibi
• Remand Deduction

Sowedi Serinyina v Uganda

Sowedi Serinyina v Uganda [2020] UGSC 6 (8 May 2020)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Judge

Mwangusya, JSC, Arach-Amoko, JSC, Katureebe, CJ, Tumwesigye, JSC, Mwondha, JSC

The Supreme Court of Uganda upheld Sowedi Serinyina’s conviction and 33-year sentence for murder and aggravated robbery, finding corroboration for co-accused confessions.

• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Sentencing Principles
• Compensation To Victims
• Joint And Several Liability
• Mitigating And Aggravating Factors
• Criminal-law

Odeke & 2 Others v Uganda

Odeke & 2 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeals 284, 287, & 429 of 2014) [2019] UGCA 2097 (8 November 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeals 284, 287, & 429 of 2014

Judge

Cheborion-Barishaki, JA, Musota, JA, Tuhaise, JA

The Court of Appeal upheld murder convictions and 25-year sentences, finding the circumstantial evidence and voluntary charge-and-caution statements proved guilt.

• Murder
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Confession Statements
• Sentencing Principles
• Common Intention
• Malice Aforethought

Kalongo & 2 Ors Vs Uganda

Kalongo & 2 Ors Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 530 of 2015) [2019] UGCA 170 (25 June 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 530 of 2015

The Court of Appeal quashed the 1st appellant’s aggravated robbery conviction, reduced the 2nd appellant’s sentence, and upheld the 3rd appellant’s sentence.

• Aggravated Robbery
• Sentencing Guidelines
• Common Intention
• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Compensation Orders
• Aggravated-robbery

Onegi & 5 Ors Vs Uganda

Onegi & 5 Ors Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2016) [2019] UGCA 23 (4 April 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2016

The Court of Appeal quashed murder and attempted murder convictions, finding the confession statements inadmissible and the identification evidence unsafe.

• Murder
• Attempted Murder
• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Torture And Inadmissibility
• Identification Evidence
• Conspiracy To Commit Felony

Sumbu Vs Uganda

Sumbu Vs Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2017) [2019] UGCA 12 (11 March 2019)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2017

The Court of Appeal dismissed a challenge to convictions for embezzlement and forgery, upheld the trial court’s findings, and confirmed the prison sentences.

• Embezzlement
• Forgery
• Territorial Jurisdiction
• Evaluation Of Evidence
• Confession Evidence
• Criminal-appeals

Uganda v Bulago

Uganda v Bulago (Criminal Session No. 65/1995) [1994] UGHCCRD 6 (21 November 1994)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Session No. 65/1995

Judge

Kato, J

The High Court found no prima facie case in a robbery charge, holding that identification was absent, the alleged confession was unreliable, and recent possession was not proved.

• Robbery
• Identification Evidence
• Recent Possession
• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Criminal-evidence
• Identification-evidence

A.Walusimbi & 3 ors v Uganda

A.Walusimbi & 3 ors v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 28 of 1992) [1994] UGSC 6 (17 March 1994)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 28 of 1992

Judge

Mayindo, DCJ, Oder, JSC, Platt, JSC

The Supreme Court held that the confessions of the appellants Walusimbi and Sekabembe were tainted by prolonged unlawful military detention and allegations of coercion, rendering them unreliable. The Court emphasized that corroboration is essential for retracted or repudiated confessions, and that confessions of co-accused cannot serve as corroboration. In the case of Walusimbi, independent evidence—specifically, his production of the murder weapon used in the robbery—was sufficient to sustain his conviction for aggravated robbery, even without reliance on his confession. For Twaha, the Court…

Source excerpt

• Confessions
• Corroboration
• Unlawful Detention
• Identification Evidence
• Retracted Confessions
• Joint Criminal Enterprise

Kanyike v Uganda

Kanyike v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 34 of 1989) [1991] UGSC 22 (19 April 1991)

Court

Supreme Court of Uganda

Case number

Criminal Appeal 34 of 1989

Judge

Wambuzi, CJ, Platt, JSC, Seaton, JSC

The Supreme Court of Uganda allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and ordered a trial de novo after finding procedural irregularities.

• Admissibility Of Confessions
• Trial Procedure
• Burden Of Proof
• Self Defence
• Change Of Plea
• Criminal-procedure

Ali and Another v The Queen

Ali and Another v The Queen (Criminal Appeal No. 201 of 1956; Criminal Appeal No. 202 of 1956) [1956] EACA 20 (1 January 1956)

Court

East African Court of Appeal

Case number

Criminal Appeal No. 201 of 1956 ; Criminal Appeal No. 202 of 1956

Judge

Forbes J, Rudd J

The court held that extra-judicial statements cannot be admitted before asking the accused whether they object to admissibility and, if disputed, trying voluntariness first.

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Extra Judicial Statements
• Voluntariness Of Statements
• Trial Procedure
• Confessions
• Procedural Fairness