- Flynote
- Criminal law
- Case summary
- Court considered whether the convicts had factors that could help mitigate the sentence of murder. The court held the factor existing was the period spent on remand by the convicts and the fact that it was possible for them to reform and be good citizens. The convicts had been on remand for four years. The offence they had committed was held by court to be one that falls within the rarest of cases category. Court accordingly instead of sentencing each of the convicts to 14 years in prison it sentenced them to 10 years each given the fact that four years had been spent on remand.
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
HIGH COURT CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO.155 OF 2014
(arising from HCT – Crim. No. 22 of 2004)
UGANDA ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PROSECUTION
VERSUS
YUDA ATIKU
BANURA DAVID :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::CONVICTS
RULING BY HON. MR. JUSTICE JOSEPH MURANGIRA
1. Introduction
1.1 This matter was placed before me in a mitigation and re-sentencing session for sentencing the convicts. It should be noted that I was not the trial Judge in this case that involved the convicts. The trial Judge was Hon. Mr. Justice Lameck N. Mukasa. The convicts were tried, convicted and sentenced to death by the aforestated Judge.
1.2 The convicts came before the High Court for sentencing pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court of Uganda in Attorney General-vs-Susan Kigula & 417 others, constitutional Petition appeal No. 3 of 2006, which found that the previous mandatory death penalty regime was unconstitutional. Each convict who was subject to the automatic death sentence and not yet exhausted the appeal process was remitted to the High Court for mitigation and sentence, which was confirmed by the subsequent case of Ambaa Jacob & Another –vs-Uganda, Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2009.
1.3 The prosecution is represented by the Directorate of Public Prosecutions. This matter was argued by Ms.Nalwanga Sherifah, State Attorney. Whereas, the convicts are represented by Mr. Senkezi Stephen of Senkezi, Saali Advocates & Consultants.
Both Counsel for the parties ably presented their mitigating factors in their submissions.
2. Sentencing the convicts.
2.1 In sentencing the convicts the following factors/reasons are considered:-
The cases of Attorney General-vs- Susan Kigula & 417 others (Supra) and Tigo Stephen –vs- Uganda Criminal Appeal No.8 of 2009.
All the mitigating factors submitted by both Counsel for the parties, which are on Court record.
The Constitutional (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, Legal Notice No.8 of 2013 particularly part 1 of the 3rd schedule.
For special emphasis, I have also considered the following factors:-
The convicts were convicted of murder, an offence that carries a maximum sentence of death.
From the facts of the case and the submissions by Counsel, though the victim was bluttally assaulted, she never died. She was admitted in Hospital, treated and recovered from the assault wounds. The facts of the case do not put this case in the rarest of the rare cases.
The convicts stole from the victims shs.400,000/= and property valued at Shs. 800,000/=.
The convicts are first offenders.
I have also considered the prison’s report, social inquiry report and the pre-sentence reports in respect of each convict and I have no doubt that the convicts have the capacity to reform.
Each convict spent about 4 years on remand before conviction, which period is taken into account in sentencing the convicts.
In the result and for the reasons given hereinabove in this ruling, I would have sentenced each convict to 14 (fourteen) years imprisonment, but I do deduct the period of 4 years each convict spent on remand. I therefore, sentence:-
Yuda Atiku to 10 years imprisonment from the date of conviction.
Banura David to 10 years imprisonment from the date of conviction.
Considering the days each convict would have got on remission of sentence, I order that each convict has already served the sentence. They should be released from custody hence with. Unless they are held on other lawful charges.
Dated at Kampala this 16th day of July, 2014.
……………………………………….
Joseph Murangira
Judge.
Court: Pursuant to Section 286 (4) of the Penal Code Act, Cap 120 Laws of Uganda, each convict is ordered to pay Shs. 1,000,000/= (one million shillings) only to the victim of crime as compensation for the loss suffered, within 30 days from today. This order shall be extracted by Counsel for the State and served on the victim’s next of keen within 14 days from today for execution purposes under the Civil Procedure Rules, S.I. 71-1.
Dated at Kampala this 16th day of July, 2014.
……………………………………….
Joseph Murangira
Judge.