Wakilii

Semulema Leonard and Alideki Patrick v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 2019)

Supreme Court · [2025] UGSC 42 · 2025 Appeal Dismissed ✦ AI-generated summary ↓ Download
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Second criminal appeal against sentence, from a Court of Appeal decision that reduced life imprisonment to 32 years on a murder conviction
Decision
Appeal dismissed; the Court of Appeal's sentences of 32 years' imprisonment maintained

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Sign in to read the full 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 Court held that the Court of Appeal did not act on a wrong principle. It did not treat the first appellant's lack of remorse as an aggravating factor; it merely distinguished between the appellants' mitigating factors and in fact reduced, rather than enhanced, the sentence. While absence of repentance can never be an aggravating factor, that principle was not breached. The complaint was in essence an appeal against the severity of sentence, which section 5(3) of the Judicature Act precludes the Supreme Court from entertaining. The appeal accordingly failed and was dismissed.

Facts

The appellants were part of a mob that attacked the late Alice Komujuni on 5 November 2011 at Makoole village, Makoole Town Council, Sembabule District. They suspected the deceased had caused the death of their brother, Ganyana Matayo. The mob used hoes and pangas (machetes) and threw bricks at her, and she succumbed to her injuries. The appellants initially fled the village, then returned home believing the matter had been settled, and were later arrested together with Ssensayi Vincent. They were indicted for murder. Ssensayi Vincent pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 7 years' imprisonment. The appellants underwent a full trial before the High Court at Masaka, were each convicted of murder, and were each sentenced to imprisonment for life. On appeal, the Court of Appeal set aside the life sentences, finding the trial court had not considered that the appellants were first offenders of youthful age, and substituted sentences of 32 years' imprisonment from the date of conviction.

Issues

  1. Whether the Justices of Appeal acted on a wrong principle by taking the first appellant's lack of remorsefulness into account when resentencing the appellants.
  2. Whether the sentences of 32 years' imprisonment were outside the appropriate sentencing range for murder committed in circumstances of mob justice.
  3. Whether the appeal, being in substance an appeal against the severity of sentence, was competent before the Supreme Court under section 5(3) of the Judicature Act.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Key headnotes

Criminal Law & Procedure — Sentencing — Mitigating and aggravating factors — Absence of remorse
Remorse is only a mitigating factor; an accused person's absence of repentance can never be treated as an aggravating factor or used as a basis for imposing a higher sentence.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Appeal against sentence — Grounds for appellate interference
An appellate court will interfere with a sentence only where the sentencing court acted on a wrong principle, overlooked a material fact, or imposed a sentence that is manifestly harsh and excessive in the circumstances.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Second appeal — Jurisdiction limited to questions of law
Under section 5(3) of the Judicature Act, an appeal to the Supreme Court against sentence lies only on a matter of law and not on the severity of the sentence; the Court will not entertain a complaint that is in substance an appeal against severity.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Second appellate court — Scope of review
As a second appellate court the Supreme Court is confined to questions of law or mixed law and fact that were before the first appellate court and does not re-evaluate the evidence afresh.

Legislation cited (5)

  • Penal Code Act, cap 120 s.188
  • Penal Code Act, cap 120 s.189
  • Judicature Act, cap 13 s.5(3)
  • Judicature Act, cap 13 s.11
  • Judicature (Supreme Court Rules) Directions SI 13-11 r.30(1)

Cases cited (10)

  • Kizito Senkula v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2001)
  • Busiku Thomas v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2011)
  • Kamya Abdullah & 4 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2015)
  • Mutatina Godfrey & Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 2015)
  • Aharikundira Yustina v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 2015)
  • Turyahabwe Ezra & 12 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2015)
  • Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
  • Livingstone Kakooza v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1993)
  • Ssenyonga v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 82 of 2020)
  • Mattaka's case (supra)
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.