UGANDA CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY - KAMPALA CAMPUS

NAME: JUUKO IBRAHIM GOLOOBA

REG NUMBER: EKS20B11/ 039

COURSE: FUNDAMENTALS OF CRIMINAL LAW

LECTURER: MR. KASOZI GEORGE

TUTOR: MR BAZIRA ANTHONY.

BRIEF FACTS

Kasadha returns from USA and joins Platform for Unity Party (PUP) a pressure group. A month
back he invites Mr. Kyagu who comes with 220 PUP diehards. Mr. Mwesi ordered the arrest of
Kasadha and all the visitors for flouting the Covid-19 Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
guidelines, Public Health Rules 2020 and Public Order Management Act. Kasadha was terribly
beaten by Afande Omutezi who also killed his body guard and driver using a bionate baton.
Afande claims to be doing his work but also, he claimed have found the driver and his wife in ‘in
fragrante delicto’ in his bed and was asked to him kill from Mrs. Kikazi’s request. The
Magistrate H/W Kawaala stated that she was going to try the culprits and charge them though
there was no law on their offenses in order to secure the future for the young. Afande Muziibu
shoot Kanabbe a boda boda chairperson Bunkoko who wanted to harm him.

ISSUE

1. Whether Kasadah and his guests can be liable for violating the Covid-19 measures?
2. Whether the laws passed in the absence of Kasadha are applicable to him
3. Whether Afande Omutezi can be liable to murder
4. Whether Mrs. Kikazi is liable for the offence of destroying evidence?
5. Whether the magistrate cannot grant bail to the people arrested?
6. Whether the Magistrate can charge kasadah for the offence not written in the law?
7. Whether Afande Muziibu can rely on self-defense?

LAW APPLICABLE

The Constitution of Uganda

Penal Code Act Cap 120

Public Order Act (2003

Police Act 20

Case Law
RESOLUTIONS

1.Whether kasadha and his guests can be liable for violating the Covid-19 measures?

1Covid-19 is a deadly disease which is caused about by a coronavirus which spreads at high
speed to the people through handshaking with an infected person or touching of the eyes, nose
and mouth. The fact that kasadha invited Mr. Kyagu who came with 220 PUP diehards violated
the President directives against covid-19 2where he banned all the public gatherings like political
rallies, cultural gatherings to safe guard the nation against corona not only that but also he didn’t
not give a notice in writing to the authorized of the intention to hold a public meeting and this
has to be done not more than fifteen days before the proposed date of the gathering which is
clearly stated in Public Management Act3 .Under the Penal Code Act ,a person that does a
negligent act which he knows of is likely to know that it will spread the infection of any disease
dangerous to life, commits an offence and is liable for imprisonment for seven years4. This
means that the people were liable for breaking the laws.

2. Whether the laws passed in the absence of Kasadha are applicable to him?

The laws passed in Uganda are presumed to be known everyone in the society Section(6) states
that ignorance of the law does not afford any excuse for any act or omission which would
otherwise constitute an offence unless knowledge of the law by the offender is expressly
declared to be an element of the offence5 in reference in the case of Uganda V Orem the
accused was arrested for defiling a girl and gave a defence of ignorance of the law but this
couldn’t stop Judge Flavia Senoga Anglin to pass on her judgement as he was sentenced to
imprisonment6 and also in Brett V Rigden a case involving of a construction of deed, Manwood
J said ‘it is to be presumed that no subject of this realm is miscognizant of the law whereby he is

1 WHO
2 Presidential directives regarding Covid-19, number 3
3
Section 5
5
Penal Code Act Cap 120
6 (CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO.459 OF 2010) [2010] UGHCCRD 50 (1 October 2013)
governed ignorance of the law excuses no one’’7,so this does not give Kasadha an excuse as his
relatives stated that he didn’t know about the laws or to rise a defence of ignorance of the law so
all the laws are applicable to Kasadha as long as he came back to Uganda though at that time he
didn’t know what he had committed would constitute to an offence but since laws were passed
and were working before his committing the crime , he had to go through all the consequences
attached to it.

3. Whether Afande Omutezi can be liable for assault and murder?

Assault is defined as any ‘‘unlawful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another,
when coupled with an apparent present ability to do so and any intentional display of force such
as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm’ 8Article 24 states that
no person shall be subjected to any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment9, in the case of George Kiggundu V Attorney General , the plaintiff testified to have
unlawful arrested and beaten an assaulted him telling him to remove his shoes, he was made to
stay in the toilet and he didn’t get any treatment which affected his body the magistrate held that
the plaintiff should be awarded as the accused serves the punishment of compensating for the
damages10 ,the actus Reus of Afande Omutezi who broke Kasadha’s back bone as he was
enforcing the laws he had to get the required punishment because he violated Article 236 which
provides ‘‘any person who commits an assault occasioning actual bodily harm commits
misdemeanor and is liable to imprisonment for five years’’11 .

He was also convicted for murder of Kasadha’s driver, Murder is defined as any person who of
malice aforethought causes the death of another person by an unlawful act omission in penal
12,
code Act Cap 120 Article 22(1) also provides that no person shall be deprived of life
intentionally except in execution of a sentence passed in a fair trial

7 1568, Plowd.342
8 Black’s law dictionary,8th edition
9 Constitution of Uganda 1995 as amended
10
(CIVIL SUIT NO.386 OF 2014) [2018] UGHCCD 189 (19 August 2019)
11 Constitution of Uganda 1995 as amended
12 Section (188)
by a court of competent jurisdiction in respect of a criminal offence under the laws of Uganda
and the conviction and sentence have been confirmed by the highest appellate court13, in case of
this was not the case with Kasadha’s driver who was killed with a bainate baton which led to the
loss of his life though Afande still claimed to be working under the orders of his commander.
Section 20 states that the police will protect the life, property and rights of an individual so
though working under orders14, it was Afande Omutezi’s duty to safeguard and protect people
other than murdering them so he is liable for murder in other words he cannot rely on the defence
of superior orders because he was sent to go and arrest the people but since he was provoked by
the driver whom he found in his bed ended up actus Reus hence murder

4.Whether Mrs. Kikazi is liable for the offence of destroying evidence?

Mrs. Kikazi the second wife of Kasadha’s driver requested Afande Omutezi to kill her husband
so she became a joint principal offenders stated in Section (19),(b) every person who does or
omits to do any act for the purpose of enabling or aiding another person to commit the offence
means that she took part in the committing the offence and may be also charged for committing
it15 .An accessory after the fact is a person who aids the offender to try escape arrest or
punishments16 .Mrs. Kikazi as an accessory of the fact hides the evidence of the gun and the
blood stained kaki trouser of Afande, in the case of R V Vinette respondent was charged for
being an accessory after the fact in the unlawful killing of a girl by Vincent ,he assisted Vincent
in throwing the girls corpse to the bottom of a flooded quarry in a weighted trunk and he was
found guilty by the jury17, Mrs. Kikazi liable for engaging herself in the offence as a joint
offender because they formed a common intention of killing the driver and it was fulfilled.

13 Constitutionof the republic of Uganda 1995

14 PoliceAct
15 Penal Code Act Cap 120
16
Black’s Law dictionary 8th edition
17 [1975] 2 S.C.R.222, Date 1974-05-27
5.Whether the magistrate cannot grant bail to the people arrested?

Article 23(6), (a) provides ‘‘the person is entitled to apply to the court to be realized on bail, and
the court may grant that person bail on such conditions as the court considers reasonable’’ 18 with
providence of this article Kasadha is free to receive his applied for bail and a person shall be
presumed to be innocent until proved guilty or until that person has pleaded guilty

6.Whether the Magistrate can charge kasadah for the offence not written in the law?

The constitution is the supreme law of the land and in Article 2, (1) it provides that ‘‘this
constitution is the supreme law of Uganda and shall have binding force on all authorities and
persons throughout Uganda’19. In the principle of legality, states that there will be no penalty
with no well-defined law which further provided in Article 28, (17) that no person shall be
charged with or convicted of a criminal offence which is founded on an act that did not at the
time it took place constitute a criminal offence20, in the case of Uganda v Atugonza, Francis
was charged with committing an offence of abuse of office though the offence was committed
between 2007 and 2008 so he would not be charged since the Anti-Corruption Act came into
force on 25th/August/200921 and this was further tested its validity in Article 28(12) which
provides that except for the contempt of court ,no person shall be convicted of a criminal offence
unless the offence is defined and the penalty for prescribed by law 22 and since there is no law
written against wearing the red belts the Magistrate has no authority to charge them with the
offence because it is not prescribed anywhere in the law

18 Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995

19 Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995
20 Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995
21 (CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENCE NO.31of 2010) [2011] UGCC 11 (1 March 2011)
22
Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995
OFFENDERS
Kasadha
He is a principal offender because he violates the SOPs given by the President and hosts the
president of Platform for Unity Party without informing the authorized people who comes with
the 220 PUP diehards.

Afande Omutezi
He beats up Kasadha to the extent of breaking his backbone which violates Article 24 which
calls for respect of human dignity and protection from inhuman treatment23 and also body assault
is punishable with two years’ imprisonment24.Afande also shot the driver of kasadah yet this act
is against Article 22,(1) that provides that no shall be deprived of life intentionally except in
execution of a sentence passed in a fair trial by a court of competent jurisdiction in respect of a
criminal offence under the laws of Uganda and the conviction and sentence have been confirmed
by the highest appellate court for the protection on life25

Mrs. Kikazi
She makes a conspiracy with Afande Omutezi to murder her husband and this is punishable in
the in Section (208)which states that ‘any person who conspires with any other person to kill any
person whether such person is in Uganda commits felony.’’26 She also assist in the hiding of the
evidence and this is stated section19(1), (b) that every person who does or omits to do any act
for the purpose of enabling or aiding another person to commit the offence is deemed to have
taken part in the offence27 and this was emphasized by Simon in the case of Crofter Hand
Woven Harris Tweed Company ltd V Veitch where he stated that conspiracy when regarded
as a crime is the agreement of two or more persons to effect any unlawful purpose and the crime
is complete if there such an agreement28 and the proof of the conspiracy is seen when Afande
shots the driver and Mrs. Kikazi hides the evidence meaning they both played their part in the
crime.

23
Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995
24 Penal Code Act Cap 120, Section 238
25Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995
26 Penal Code Act Cap. 120
27 Penal Code Act Cap. 120
28 [1942] AC 435
Afande Omuziibu
He shoots Kanabbe which results to murder as stated in the penal code that any person who
malice aforethought causes the death of another person by an unlawful act omission commits
murder29 and he violated Article 22 (1) no person which provides that no person shall be
deprived of life intentionally except in execution of a sentence passed in a fair trial by a court of
competent jurisdiction in respect of a criminal offence under the laws of Uganda and the
conviction and sentence have been confirmed by the highest appellate court30 .

POSSIBLE DEFENCES

1.Whether Afande Omuziibu can rely on self defence?

According to the Black’s law dictionary, self defence is defined as the use of force to protect
oneself ,one’s family or one’s property from a real or threatened attack31 in the case of R V
Palmer the defendant had gone with other men to buy drugs, while there altercation happened
and the defendant left without paying and as they were chased , the defendant shot and killed one
of the men that were chasing , he claimed it was self defence though he was convicted of
murder32 , stated in Section 15(a) states that for the use of in the defence of person and
property33 Section15(b)in respect of rash, reckless or neglect acts, shall be determined according
to the principles of English law34 , English law states person can use reasonable force to defend
himself from an attack, according to the statement of Afande Omuziibu he said he was trying to
protect the people around him since the deceased wanted to disarm him.

29 Section 188
30 Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995
31 9th edition, page 1481
32 [1971]AC 814
33 Penal Code Act Cap.120
34 Penal Code Act Cap.120
BIBIOGRAPH
Constitution of the republic of Uganda 1995 as amended

Statutes
Penal code act cap.120
Police act
Public management act
Covid-19 presidential directives

Books
Black’s law dictionary, 4th edition
Black’s law dictionary 8th edition
Black’s law dictionary 9th edition

Cases
Uganda V Orem (CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO.459 OF 2010) [2010] UGHCCRD 50
(1 October 2013)
Brett V Rigden 1568, Plowd.34
R V Vinette [1975] 2 S.C.R.222, Date 1974-05-27
Uganda v Atugonza (CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENCE NO.31of 2010) [2011] UGCC 11 (1
March 2011)
Crofter Hand Woven Harris Tweed Company Ltd V Veitch [1942] AC 435
R V Palmer [1971]AC 814