Awas Lucia v Attorney General [2017] UGHRC 28
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
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.
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 Tribunal held that UPDF soldiers violated the right to life of Thiyokon Mariko, an LC1 chairman, when they shot and killed him during a cordon and search operation. Although no witness directly saw the shooting, overwhelming circumstantial evidence established that only the soldiers were armed in the village where the deceased was killed. The Government, represented by the Attorney General, was held vicariously liable for the soldiers' actions as they were on duty. The Tribunal awarded UGX 25,000,000 in general damages to the estate of the deceased.
Outcome
Complaint allowed; Government ordered to compensate the estate of the deceased for violation of right to life
Facts
On 29 January 2008, UPDF soldiers conducted a cordon and search operation for illegal firearms in Lomurunyangae village, Namalusubcounty, Nakapiripirit district. Thiyokon Mariko, the LC1 chairman of the village, went out of his house to inform villagers not to be scared of the soldiers' presence. He was shot and killed during the operation. The complainant, Awas Lucia, was the deceased's wife. Witnesses testified that soldiers surrounded the village, ordered residents out, and conducted searches. No guns were recovered from the complainant's village, but seven guns were found in the neighbouring Loregai village. A post-mortem examination revealed bullet wounds on the deceased's neck and thigh as the cause of death. Authorities promised to investigate but took no action. The Respondent did not call witnesses but argued that no one directly witnessed the shooting and that identification was difficult.
Issues
- Whether Thiyokon Mariko's right to life was violated by the Respondent's agents?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to any remedies?
Orders
- The complaint is allowed.
- The Respondent is ordered to pay the Administrator of the estate of the late Thiyokon Mariko a sum of UGX 25,000,000 as general damages for violation of his right to life.
- Interest at 10% per annum to be paid on the mentioned amount calculated from the date of this decision until payment in full.
- Each party shall bear their own costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 22(1)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 53(2)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 119(4)(c)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 Article 209(c)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 6(1)
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 4
Cases cited (4)
- Oryem Richard v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 22)
- Joseph Magezi v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 1999)
- Juman Abukoji v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. G/326/1999)
- Omong Juk v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. GA67/1998)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.