Wakilii

Barihaihi & Anor v Director of Public Prosecutions (Misc. Cause No. 67 of 2011)

High Court · [2012] UGHC 204 · 2012 Damages Awarded AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for judicial review of criminal proceedings following arrest and charge with treason that remained pending for approximately 10 years
Decision
Application partly allowed. Prayers for certiorari and prohibition abated. Damages awarded to both applicants with interest and costs.

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

Held that where the Director of Public Prosecutions discontinues criminal proceedings after approximately 10 years without trial, during which the accused persons were charged with treason and required to answer bail, this constitutes an abuse of court process and a contravention of the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 28(1). The court may award damages under Rule 8 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009 for the trauma and restraint suffered, even though the accused were on bail for most of the period.

Outcome

Application partly allowed. Prayers for certiorari and prohibition abated. Damages awarded to both applicants with interest and costs.

Facts

The applicants were arrested in 2002 and charged with treason in Criminal Case No. 640/02 at Buganda Road Chief Magistrate's Court. Before being charged, they were kept in a safe house where they were tortured and brutalised. They were remanded at Kigo Prison for one year and released on bail on 9 May 2003. The applicants answered bail for approximately 8-9 years without being committed for trial. During this period, the 1st applicant lost his job with Luwero Industries and could not seek employment abroad due to the pending charges. The 2nd applicant, a ballistic consultant, was abandoned by his wife and remained unemployed as he could not hold a licence in ballistic consultancy with such charges. In 2011, the applicants filed an application for judicial review seeking certiorari, prohibition, a declaration that the proceedings were an abuse of process, and damages. The DPP subsequently discontinued the criminal proceedings against the applicants.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants are entitled to damages for continued unlawful restraint and torture visited upon them when they were arrested.
  2. Whether the act of the DPP in failing to commit the applicants for trial to the High Court or discontinuing the charges after approximately 10 years constituted an abuse of court process.
  3. Whether it is lawful for an accused person to continue on bail indefinitely without an end of trial in sight.

Orders

  • The prayers for certiorari and prohibition abated following the DPP's discontinuation of the criminal proceedings.
  • General damages of UGX 40,000,000 awarded to each applicant.
  • Interest of 20% per annum on the damages awarded from the date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the application awarded to the applicants.

Rules and key headnotes

Constitutional Rights — Right to Fair and Speedy Trial — Article 28(1)
Article 28(1) of the Constitution enshrines the right to a fair, speedy and public hearing in the determination of any criminal charge, and the failure to bring an accused person to trial for close to ten years constitutes a contravention of this constitutional right.
Powers of the DPP — Abuse of Court Process — Article 120(5)
Although the Director of Public Prosecutions is not subject to the direction and control of any authority under Article 120(5) of the Constitution, the DPP must have regard to the public interest, the interest of the administration of justice, and the need to prevent abuse of the legal process. Keeping an accused person facing treason charges for close to ten years without trial constitutes an abuse of the court process.
Effect of Discontinuance on Prerogative Orders
Where the Director of Public Prosecutions discontinues criminal proceedings against an applicant, an application for judicial review seeking orders of certiorari and prohibition to quash those proceedings abates, as the prerogative orders are no longer relevant.
Damages in Judicial Review — Rule 8 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009
Under Rule 8 of the Judicature (Judicial Review) Rules 2009, the court may award damages to an applicant in judicial review proceedings if the applicant has included a claim for damages in the motion and the court is satisfied that if the claim had been made in an action begun at the time of making the application, damages could have been awarded.
Assessment of Damages — General Damages for Unlawful Restraint and Abuse of Process
Where criminal charges are discontinued after approximately ten years without trial, general damages may be awarded for the trauma and restraint suffered by the accused persons, even though they were on bail for most of the period. Speculative formulas for assessing unearned income over an entire working life are not tenable.

Legislation cited (10)

Cases cited (1)

  • Namuddu Hanifa v The Returning Officer of Kampala District & 2 Ors (Misc. Cause No. 69 of 2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Barihaihi & Anor v Director of Public Prosecutions (Misc. Cause No. 67 of 2011) [2012] UGHC 204 (5 October 2012)
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.