Kabuleta v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Cause 8 of 2023)
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 civilians charged with unlawful possession of ammunition ordinarily the monopoly of the Defence Forces become subject to military law under UPDF Act s.119(1)(h) and may be tried by the General Court Martial. Where detainees are under trial and witnesses have testified, the provisions of UPDF Act s.190(3) requiring release after 90 days do not apply. Application for unconditional release and compensation dismissed.
Outcome
Application for enforcement of human rights dismissed; detainees remain in custody pending trial at General Court Martial
Facts
Thirty-two persons were arrested between 10 May 2021 and 30 May 2021 and charged before the General Court Martial with unlawful possession of ammunition ordinarily the monopoly of the Defence Forces contrary to UPDF Act s.119(1)(h). They were remanded to Kitalya government prison and denied bail. The applicant, Kabuleta Joseph Kiiza, filed an application seeking their immediate release, arguing that their continued detention beyond 90 days violated UPDF Act s.190(3) and their constitutional rights to personal liberty. The respondent opposed, stating that the accused persons were properly charged, their trial had commenced with one witness having testified, and they had applied for bail which was denied in the court's discretion. A further bail application was pending.
Issues
- Whether the criminal proceedings and trial vide Criminal Case UPDF/GCM/072/2021 are lawful
- Whether the continued detention of the 32 detainees is lawful and legal
- What remedies are available to the applicant
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (31)
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.23
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.28
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.50
- Constitution of Uganda 1995 art.126(2)
- Judicature Act s.14(1)
- Judicature Act s.14(2)(c)
- Judicature Act s.33
- Judicature Act s.35
- Judicature Act s.39(2)
- Judicature Act s.40(1)
- Judicature Act s.48(i)
- Judicature Act s.48(d)
- Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 s.3
- Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 s.4
- Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 s.9
- Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 s.15
- Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 s.15(1)
- Human Rights (Enforcement) Act 2019 s.15(4)
- Trial on Indictment Act Cap 23 s.141
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.119(1)(h)
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.119(1)(h)(i)
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.179
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.190(3)
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.190(6)
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.197
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.209
- Uganda People's Defence Force Act 2005 s.210
- Uganda Defence Forces (Rules of Procedure) Regulations SI 307-1 reg.5
- Firearms Act Cap 229 s.3(1)
- Firearms Act Cap 229 s.3(1)(a)
- Firearms Act Cap 229 s.3(2)(a)
Cases cited (3)
- Namugerwa Hadijah v Attorney General (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2012)
- Attorney General v Uganda Law Society (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2006)
- Uganda Law Society vs. Attorney General (supra)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.