What is a life worth in Uganda's courts?

4 July 2019 · Carmel Rickard

Two recent decisions from the civil division of Uganda’s high court provide an interesting contrast. International media have picked up on one of them, in which a man was arrested by police, “violently beaten” by them and then taken to the cells where he was found dead next morning. The other, given virtually no publicity, concerns a man who was unlawfully held for four days in detention and then spent the next four years, on bond, forced to report regularly to police, before his bond was cancelled and the whole issue collapsed. Which case do you think won the higher damages award by the court?

Read the Bikyahaga judgment

Read the Bwogi judgment

Decisions by Judge Musa Ssekaana of Uganda’s high court civil division are always worth close attention. Earlier this year, for example, he delivered a landmark judgment on unlawful evictions being a violation of the right to life, dignity and property. As part of that decision he made an order compelling the government to develop comprehensive guidelines governing land evictions, with a seven-month deadline for reporting back to the court on progress that had been made.

Against this exemplary background, I was puzzled by two of his most recent judgments.

Reports about one have been widely published internationally. This was a case in which a man was dragged out of a “film house” by police, beaten up and then thrown into a police cell, obviously badly injured. He was found dead next morning.

Two days later a top police officer issued a statement referred to by the court as a “condolence message” which read, in part, “The management of the Uganda Police Force was disturbed by the fact that preliminary investigations show the death occurred at the hands of three policemen who had gone to effect an arrest of the late (Ronald Bikyahaga).”

This, said the judge, was “uncontroverted evidence” that Bikyahaga’s death was at the hands of the police. Though the police disputed liability, arguing that those responsible for Bikyahaga’s death were not acting in an official capacity, the court found the police liable saying “the police officers deliberately and illegally tortured the deceased which is unconstitutional”.

He added that Uganda’s constitution guarantees and protects “the life of every citizen ... as well as the right against torture, degrading and inhumane treatment. The errant police officers violated the non-derogable rights of the deceased against torture and his right to life which accordingly calls for compensation.”

Bikyahaga’s mother, Joyce Bikyahaga Namata, who had brought the claim, asked for “general damages, special damages, interest and costs”.

Judge Ssekaana, having found the police liable, duly ordered the Attorney General (on behalf of the government) to pay her compensation for the “arbitrary and unlawful deprivation of the right to life of (her) son.” The compensation he awarded for the unlawful deprivation of the life of her son, was UGX 25.000.000 at 12 % interest from the date of judgment. The judge did not specify whether this award was for general damages or special damages, but also gave costs against the police as Namata had requested.

The second case, judgment in which was delivered on the same day as the Bikyahaga matter, concerns Kastor Bwogi, the Orient Bank (Uganda) and the Attorney General.

In June 2012 Bwogi was interrogated at the bank about an alleged theft of UGX 350.000.000. Then he was taken to the police station where he was “coerced to make a statement”. He was imprisoned for four days in the police cells – unlawfully, as he should have been taken to court after two days – and later released on police bond. In terms of that bond, he had to report regularly to the police while investigations continued. For the next four years and more he kept reporting until the police eventually cancelled the bond. During all those years, and since, nothing more was heard about the bank theft.

The judge found Bwogi had been unlawfully detained and his rights violated. The constitution says that anyone who has been arrested must be brought to a court of law within 48 hours, and yet he was held for an extra two days of wrongful imprisonment by the police for which he was entitled to compensation. The court also accepted that he was forced to continue reporting to police for more than four years.

Judge Ssekaana awarded Bwogi UGX 25.000.000 for general damages in relation to the arrest and illegal detention as well as for being made to report to the police for four years “without being discharged of any wrong doing”.

In addition, Bwogi had asked for “punitive or exemplary damages” for false imprisonment and detention. Damages under these headings are awarded “to punish the defendant for the wrong done” and to act as a deterrent. Saying that any constitutional violation by the police who are supposed to uphold and protect the constitution, “must attract a punitive sanction”, the judge gave Bwogi an additional UGX 10.000.000

As with the Bikyahaga case, he also ordered the government to pay interest of 12 % from the date of judgment, plus costs.

As I read the Bikyahaga decision I noticed that the case, originally filed in 2008, and concerning an unlawful death in 2007, was only now being heard and finalized, well over 10 years later. It has nothing to do with the presiding judge, of course, but such systemic delays in the justice system should be a matter of serious concern.

I also found it significant that the court had no words for the police, other than quoting the constitution. Where was the hope expressed that those responsible would be prosecuted? Or condemnation for those who should uphold the law, instead taking the law into their own hands? Surely, in cases like this, no judges of Uganda's Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court could take exception to such remarks from the High Court. Their absence, however, adds to the view that the courts are removed from the experience of ordinary people, and that they care very little.

For interest, I also noted that the Bwogi decision involved some 2333 words, while judgment on compensation for the gruesome killing of Bikyahaga took just 1114 words to conclude – about the length of this article.

And then there is the question of the damages awarded. No question that Bwogi had a rough deal and that it was inexcusable for the police to subject him to four years of bond reporting – all for nothing. But does that explain why the police will have to pay damages of UGX 25.000.000 for effectively murdering a detainee, and UGX 35.000.000 to someone who, however poorly he was treated, at least did not lose his life?

Carmel Rickard

About the author

Recent articles by Carmel Rickard

‘No justification for the unjustifiable’: Lesotho’s ombud slams grand-scale torture, assault in Maseru prison

22 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Lesotho’s national ombud, Tlotliso Angelina Polaki, has issued a scathing report on massive-scale torture and assaults that took place in Maseru’s central correctional institution during December 2023, leaving about 95% of the inmates of the prison injured, one dead and one who is now wheelchair-bound and will never walk again.

Major court decision on image rights benefits Ugandan soccer players

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Members of Uganda’s national soccer team from the period around 2007/8 have just been awarded a payout against MTN Uganda by the commercial court. The telecom giant had a year-long contract with Proline, the players’ originating development soccer club, allowing it to use the players’ images for advertising. But MTN had continued to use their images even after that contract expired on the basis that it had a sponsorship agreement with Fufa, soccer’s governing body in Uganda. The players then challenged MTN in court, through Proline, and have now won a significant damages award. But the judgment exposed some serious flaws in the way that Fufa has approached the question of using the image rights of its senior players, and the court commented that this is a ‘case study’ for why Fufa needs to sort out its contractual arrangements with senior players.

Executive interference in Ugandan court decisions continues – this time by the justice minister

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Uganda’s minister of justice, Norbert Mao, has taken a leaf straight from the book of the country’s president, Yoweri Museveni. This week, the minister wrote to the principal judge of the Ugandan high court, asking that the judge directly intervene in a matter that has been brought to his attention by an MP on behalf of a constituent. Mao asked for the ‘immediate administrative intervention’ in the matter by the principal judge. Earlier this year, Museveni wrote a similar letter to the chief justice of Uganda, also requesting intervention in a matter, and the CJ later indicated that this was not the first time it had happened.

Is rape by family members treated too lightly by the law?

19 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

The high court has sent the case of a Malawian teenager, charged with raping his 89-year-old grandmother, back to the magistrate’s court for a possible re-trial because the court had wrongly prosecuted a case of rape instead of incest. If convicted in a re-trial, however, Malawi’s incest law could see the accused sentenced to a mere five years. Malawi’s penal code provides for a significant difference between the sentence to be imposed when a man rapes a close family member, and in a case where the two are not related. When they are unrelated, the code provides that a rape offender ‘shall be liable to be punished with death or with imprisonment for life’ (However, Malawi has had what amounts to a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty since 1992.) By contrast, ‘incest by males’, is categorised in the code as a ‘felony’, and anyone convicted ‘shall be liable for imprisonment for five years’. There is an exception: if it is proved ‘that the female person is under the age of 16, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for life’.

Prominent SA advocates lose battle over conviction in Namibian courts for working without a permit, misleading immigration officials

6 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Two prominent South African advocates have just lost their last hope of squashing their convictions in the Namibian courts. Johannesburg advocates, Mike Hellens SC and Dawie Joubert SC, had been found guilty on two counts, first, working as legal practitioners without an employment permit, and second, giving false or misleading information to immigration officers when they entered the country in 2019. Though they had gone to Namibia to appear in court in a bail application, they told the immigration officials they were there for a ‘visit’ and for a ‘meeting’. Both appealed against their conviction but they had also asked for a judicial review of the decision. In the high court they lost their appeal but won on the review. The outcome in both matters were taken to the apex supreme court for a final word. In December 2023, they lost their appeal at the supreme court. What would that same court say when the state appealed against the review finding? The supreme court has now given its answer: it found the review, that had favoured Hellens and Joubert, was wrongly decided, and set it aside, awarding costs against the two advocates in both the high court and the supreme court.