Musede v Uganda [2019] UGSC 69

Supreme Court · 2019 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download

Jurisdiction

Uganda

Case Type

Second criminal appeal to the Supreme Court against sentence, from the Court of Appeal's resentencing under section 11 of the Judicature Act

Decision

Appeal dismissed; appellant to continue serving the 32 years and 6 months' imprisonment imposed by the Court of Appeal, running from 16 December 2004.

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions — always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. Under section 5(3) of the Judicature Act an appellant has no right of appeal to the Supreme Court on the severity of sentence, only on a matter of law; the appellant's first ground was in substance a complaint about severity and was incompetent. On the second ground, the Court of Appeal correctly applied Rwabugande Moses v Uganda and Article 23(8) of the Constitution: the remand period to be deducted is only that spent in lawful custody before conviction. The nine years spent after the 2004 conviction while awaiting execution was not remand but time as a convict, so only 3 years and 6 months was deductible.

Facts

The appellant was convicted of murder on 16 December 2004 by the High Court at Mbale and, under the then mandatory regime, sentenced to death. After Attorney General v Kigula declared the mandatory death sentence unconstitutional, his file was remitted to the High Court for mitigation, where Mugamba J resentenced him to 35 years' imprisonment. On appeal, the Court of Appeal found that sentence illegal because the judge had failed to deduct the remand period as required by Article 23(8) of the Constitution. Applying Rwabugande Moses v Uganda, the Court of Appeal set the sentence aside, resentenced the appellant to 35 years, deducted the 3 years and 6 months he had spent on remand before conviction, and ordered him to serve 32 years and 6 months from 16 December 2004. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, contending the sentence was harsh and excessive and that the full period in custody, including roughly nine years after conviction, should have been deducted.

Issues

Whether the appellant, appealing against the severity of his sentence, had a right of appeal to the Supreme Court under section 5(3) of the Judicature Act.
Whether the Court of Appeal, in sentencing the appellant to 32 years and 6 months' imprisonment, complied with Article 23(8) of the Constitution by properly deducting only the period actually spent on remand before conviction.

Orders

Appeal dismissed.
The appellant is to continue serving his sentence as imposed by the Court of Appeal.

Key headnotes

Criminal Law & Procedure — Appeals — Right of Appeal Against Sentence — Severity Excluded

An accused person has no right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the severity of a sentence; under section 5(3) of the Judicature Act an appeal against sentence lies only on a matter of law.

Criminal Law & Procedure — Appeals — Characterisation of Grounds — Substance Over Form

A ground of appeal that labels a sentence 'illegal' but whose arguments all turn on the sentence being too long is in substance a complaint about severity and is therefore incompetent.

Constitutional Law — Article 23(8) — Deduction of Remand Period — Meaning of Lawful Custody Before Conviction

For the purposes of Article 23(8) of the Constitution, the period to be taken into account in sentencing is only that which the convict spent in lawful custody before the completion of trial; time spent after conviction while awaiting execution of sentence is not remand and is not deductible.

Legislation cited (4)

Judicature Act s.11
Judicature Act s.5(3)
Constitution of Uganda Article 23(8)
Children Act s.104

Cases cited (6)

Attorney General v Susan Kigula and 417 Others (Constitutional Appeal No. 3 of 2006)
Rwabugande Moses v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2014)
Okello Geoffrey v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2014)
Abelle Asuman v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2016)
Tumwesigye Anthony v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2012)
Tigo Stephen v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2009)

Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.