Abbo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 168 of 2018)

Observed later treatment

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Holding

The Court of Appeal dismissed a murder appeal on two grounds. On the summing up ground, it found from the original handwritten record that the trial Judge had in fact summed up to the assessors, and held that section 82 of the Trial on Indictments Act, though couched in mandatory terms, is directory; failure to strictly comply does not upset a full trial where the appellant's right to be heard was not impinged. On sentence, the Court held it would not interfere with the trial Judge's discretion unless the sentence was illegal, based on a wrong principle, or manifestly excessive; given the cruel poisoning of a stepchild in her custody, 40 years' imprisonment was appropriate.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; conviction and 40-year sentence for murder confirmed

Facts

The appellant cohabited as man and wife with Otundi, the father of the deceased six-year-old John Peter Etyang alias Junior, in Tororo District. Otundi had children from a previous relationship, including the deceased, who lived with the couple. On 12 August 2011, Otundi went to the garden leaving the appellant and children at home. The appellant sent the deceased's sister, Nyafwono, to fetch water. The deceased emerged with a foul smell from his mouth and told his sister their "mother" (the appellant) had given him "a coke soda" to drink, showing her an empty bottle containing a smelly substance. The appellant then rushed out to join her husband. The deceased began crying, vomiting foul-smelling substances, and was taken to a nearby clinic where he died about 30 minutes later. The appellant was indicted, convicted of murder, and sentenced to 40 years' imprisonment.

Issues

1. Whether the trial Judge failed to sum up the law and evidence to the assessors, thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice.
2. Whether the sentence of 40 years' imprisonment was manifestly harsh and excessive.

Orders

• Ground 1 dismissed.
• Ground 2 dismissed.
• Sentence of 40 years' imprisonment upheld.
• Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Penal Code Act s.188
• Penal Code Act s.189
• Trial on Indictments Act s.82
• Trial on Indictments Act s.82(1)
• Constitution of Uganda art.126(2)(e)
• Court of Appeal Rules r.2(2)
• Court of Appeal Rules r.5
• Court of Appeal Rules r.43(1)

Cases cited (12)

• Adiga v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 157 of 2010)
• Tumwesigye v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2012)
• Mulolo v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 504 of 2017)
• Bernard Kiwalabye v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 2001)
• Kyalimpa Edward v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1995)
• Byaruhanga Foclori v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 1999)
• Komakech v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1990)
• Angeta v Republic [2001] EA 125
• Bakubuye Muzamiru and Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 56 of 2015)
• Robert v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 148 of 2009)
• Bukenya Muhammad and 2 Others v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 903 of 2014)
• Sunday Gordon v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 103 of 2006)

Cases citing this judgment (4)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Uganda v Twiine Johnson and Another (Criminal Sessions Case No. 254 of 2021)
• Uganda v Kwoshawo Geofrey (Criminal Sessions Case No. 91 of 2016)
• Kabaaho v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 503 of 2015)
• Shikanga v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 153 of 2015)

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.