Uganda Case Law

Legal and Human Rights Center and Liberatus Mwang'ombe v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 041/2020)

Legal and Human Rights Center and Liberatus Mwang'ombe v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 041/2020) [2025] AfCHPR 17 (20 May 2025)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 041/2020

Judge

Adjei J, Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Gaswaga J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko VP, Tchikaya J

The African Court reopened pleadings in a case challenging Tanzania’s voting restrictions on prisoners and diaspora citizens, and gave the State 7 days to respond.

• Right To Vote
• Political Participation
• Prisoners Rights
• Diaspora Voting
• Election Law
• Access To Justice

Dibgolongo v Republic of Burkina Faso (Application No. 013/2019)

Dibgolongo v Republic of Burkina Faso (Application No. 013/2019) [2022] AfCHPR 23 (22 September 2022)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 013/2019

Judge

Aboud P, Adjei J, Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko J, Tchikaya VP

The African Court held that it had jurisdiction but declared the application inadmissible because the applicant did not exhaust local remedies, especially cassation.

• Fair Trial Rights
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
• Right To Effective Remedy
• Judicial Review
• Prisoners Rights
• Exhaustion-of-local-remedies

Male H.Mabirizi K.Kiwanuka Vs Uganda

Male H.Mabirizi K.Kiwanuka Vs Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 4 of 2022) [2022] UGHCCRD 27 (23 June 2022)

Court

HC: Criminal Division (Uganda)

Case number

Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 4 of 2022

Judge

Muwata, J

The court held that denial of internet access to a convict does not violate the right to a fair hearing, as neither the Constitution nor the Prisons Act provides for such a right. The restriction is justified by security concerns and the objectives of imprisonment. The applicant has alternative means to access information, such as the prison library and legal clinic, or through a legal clerk. The court order dated 7th April 2022 was directed specifically to the O/C Kitalya Mini Max and ceased to have effect upon the applicant's transfer to Luzira prison. There is no basis to hold the responde…

Source excerpt

• Prisoners Rights
• Fair Hearing
• Contempt Of Court
• Access To Information

Bigabwa v Attorney General (compliant no. 49/2008)

Bigabwa v Attorney General (compliant no. 49/2008) [2018] UGHRC 28 (12 April 2018)

Court

Uganda Human Rights Commission

Case number

compliant no. 49/2008

Judge

Stephen Basaliza - Commissioner

The Tribunal found that the complainant's right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment was violated by agents of the respondent. The oral testimonies of the complainant and corroborating witness were consistent and credible, establishing that the complainant was intentionally beaten and subjected to degrading treatment by prison staff acting in their official capacity. The medical evidence was inconclusive, but the law does not require medical evidence where credible oral evidence exists. The respondent failed to rebut the complainant's evidence or pre…

Source excerpt

• Freedom From Torture
• Vicarious Liability
• Prisoners Rights
• Compensation For Human Rights Violations

Alex Twinomugisha v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 179 of 2006)

Alex Twinomugisha v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 179 of 2006) [2017] UGHRC 3 (16 November 2017)

Court

Uganda Human Rights Commission

Case number

Complaint UHRC 179 of 2006

Judges

Joseph A. A. Etima, Commissioner

The Tribunal found that the Complainant was subjected to severe beatings by prison warders while in custody, resulting in grievous injuries as corroborated by medical evidence. The Respondent failed to provide any plausible explanation for the injuries sustained by the Complainant while in state custody, as required by law. The acts of the prison warders constituted torture within the meaning of international and Ugandan law, and the State is vicariously liable for the actions of its agents. The right to freedom from torture is absolute and non-derogable under the Constitution of Uganda. The…

Source excerpt

• Freedom From Torture
• Prisoners Rights
• Vicarious Liability
• Compensation For Human Rights Violations