Uganda Case Law

XYZ v Republic of Benin (Application No. 009/2020)

XYZ v Republic of Benin (Application No. 009/2020) [2025] AfCHPR 26 (26 June 2025)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 009/2020

Judge

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

The Court held that it has material, personal, temporal, and territorial jurisdiction to hear the application, as the alleged violations concern rights protected by the Charter and the application was filed before the respondent State's withdrawal of its Article 34(6) Declaration took effect. However, the Court found the application inadmissible for failure to exhaust local remedies. The applicant did not seize the Constitutional Court of Benin, which is an available and effective remedy for constitutional and human rights claims, including challenges to the Amnesty Law. The Court reiterated…

Source excerpt

• Right To Life
• Right To Dignity
• Right To Fair Hearing
• Amnesty Laws
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies

Alango Katorin v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 16 of 2008)

Alango Katorin v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 16 of 2008) [2025] UGHRC 1 (20 February 2025)

Court

Uganda Human Rights Commission

Case number

Complaint UHRC 16 of 2008

Judges

Mariam Wangadya - Chairperson, Stephen Basaliza - Commissioner, Omara Apitta Lamex - Commissioner, Crispin Kaheru - Commissioner

The tribunal found that a prisoner died after being taken from Erute Prison by police, held the state vicariously liable for the unlawful killing, and awarded damages.

• Right To Life
• State Liability
• Death In Custody
• Vicarious Liability
• Compensation For Human Rights Violation
• Right-to-life

Jinyamu v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 015/2018)

Jinyamu v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 015/2018) [2024] AfCHPR 30 (13 November 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 015/2018

Judge

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

The African Court found Tanzania violated rights to life and dignity by imposing a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but rejected the fair trial claim.

• Right To Life
• Mandatory Death Penalty
• Right To Dignity
• Cruel Inhuman Degrading Treatment
• Fair Trial Rights
• Judicial Discretion In Sentencing

Kalonge v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 024/2018)

Kalonge v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 024/2018) [2024] AfCHPR 28 (13 November 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 024/2018

Judge

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

The African Court held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty violated the right to life and that hanging violated dignity, but dismissed the other claims.

• Mandatory Death Penalty
• Right To Life
• Right To Dignity
• Fair Trial Standards
• Method Of Execution
• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies

Nyerere v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 023/2018)

Nyerere v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 023/2018) [2024] AfCHPR 24 (13 November 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 023/2018

Judge

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

The court found that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty under Tanzanian law violates Article 4 of the African Charter, as it deprives judicial officers of discretion and fails to consider individual circumstances, rendering the punishment arbitrary and contrary to the right to life. The method of execution by hanging was held to violate Article 5, as it constitutes cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment and undermines human dignity. The applicant's allegations of torture and unfair trial were not substantiated, as domestic courts had addressed these issues and no manifest error or…

Source excerpt

• Mandatory Death Penalty
• Right To Life
• Right To Dignity
• Fair Trial Rights
• Torture And Inhuman Treatment
• Remedies And Reparations

Bazil v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 027/2018)

Bazil v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 027/2018) [2024] AfCHPR 27 (13 November 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 027/2018

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 found no fair trial violation in Lameck Bazil’s murder conviction, but held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty and hanging violated the rights to life and dignity.

• Right To Life
• Right To Dignity
• Fair Trial
• Mandatory Death Penalty
• Method Of Execution
• Fair-trial

Namale & Another v Horeb Services Uganda Limited & Another

Namale & Another v Horeb Services Uganda Limited & Another (Miscellaneous Cause 21 of 2023) [2024] UGHCCD 152 (7 October 2024)

Court

HC: Civil Division (Uganda)

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause 21 of 2023

Judge

Boniface Wamala, J

The court held that both applicants had locus standi to bring the application for enforcement of human rights under Article 50 of the Constitution and the Human Rights (Enforcement) Act, as locus standi is based on the claim of violation, not relationship or direct interest. The pleadings disclosed a cause of action against both respondents, as the Human Rights (Enforcement) Act permits joining parties where liability is uncertain. The 1st respondent, as the licensed recruitment agency, bore primary responsibility for the safety and welfare of Namutamba Milly, and its failure to operate withi…

Source excerpt

• Human Rights Enforcement
• Migrant Worker Protection
• Right To Life
• Corporate Liability
• Access To Information
• Damages Assessment

Bahanla v Burkina Faso (Application No. 016/2019)

Bahanla v Burkina Faso (Application No. 016/2019) [2024] AfCHPR 18 (3 September 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 016/2019

Judge

Adjei J, Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko VP, Tchikaya J

The Court found that the applicant had not exhausted local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules of Court. The cassation appeal, which is recognized as an effective and sufficient remedy in Burkina Faso, was still pending at the time the application was filed. The applicant did not provide evidence that the delay in the cassation proceedings was unduly prolonged. As exhaustion of local remedies is a cumulative and mandatory admissibility requirement, and the applicant failed to meet it, the Court declared the application inadmissible without consi…

Source excerpt

• Exhaustion Of Local Remedies
• Right To Fair Trial
• Right To Life
• Right To Human Dignity

Zabron v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 051/2016)

Zabron v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 051/2016) [2024] AfCHPR 34 (4 June 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 051/2016

Judge

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

The African Court found Tanzania violated Zabron’s rights to life, dignity, fair trial, and consular assistance, but not effective legal representation or interpreter rights.

• Right To Life
• Mandatory Death Penalty
• Right To Dignity
• Fair Trial Standards
• Consular Assistance
• Prison Conditions

Damian v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 048/2016)

Damian v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 048/2016) [2024] AfCHPR 8 (4 June 2024)

Court

African Court on Human and Peoples Rights

Case number

Application No. 048/2016

Judge

Adjei J, Anukam J, Ben Achour J, Bensaoula J, Chizumila J, Eno R, Kioko J, Mengue J, Ntsebeza J, Sacko VP, Tchikaya J

The court found that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty under Tanzanian law deprived judicial officers of discretion to consider the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the offender, rendering the penalty arbitrary and in violation of Article 4 of the Charter. The court further held that execution by hanging constitutes cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, violating Article 5. The court dismissed allegations of fair trial violations, finding that the applicant was tried within a reasonable time, was afforded effective legal representation, and that the evidence was p…

Source excerpt

• Right To Life
• Death Penalty
• Right To Dignity
• Fair Trial Rights
• Mandatory Sentencing
• Cruel Inhuman Degrading Treatment