Kalule William v Attorney General [2018] UGHRC 56
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 police officers violated the complainant's constitutional rights to freedom from torture and personal liberty. The complainant was beaten during arrest, causing him to lose consciousness and suffer injuries requiring medical treatment. His detention exceeded the constitutional 48-hour limit before being produced in court. The Tribunal awarded UGX 4,000,000 for torture and applied the established rate of UGX 2,000,000 per seven days of unlawful detention. The Attorney General was held vicariously liable for the actions of police officers.
Outcome
Complaint upheld; compensation awarded for torture and unlawful detention
Facts
On 12 August 2006, Kalule William was arrested by four armed police officers at Kiwoko trading centre on suspicion of stealing goats. He was detained at Kiwoko police station for two days without making a statement. The owner of the stolen goats informed police that the complainant was not among the thieves. Despite this, he remained in detention for five more days before being produced in court on 17 August 2006 and remanded at Bututumula prison. After five days on remand he was granted bail. Subsequently, he was arrested again on a Friday by three policemen. When he inquired about the reason for arrest, he was beaten severely until he became unconscious and bled from his nose and ears. He spent two days in detention without medical treatment. On Monday he was informed he was suspected of assault and robbery. He was produced in court and the case was dismissed. Following his release, he experienced chest pain and was admitted at Equator Clinic Kawempe for nine days. Medical treatment notes corroborated his injuries.
Issues
- Whether the Complainant's right of protection from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was violated.
- Whether the Complainant's right to personal liberty was violated.
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to any remedies.
Orders
- Complaint allowed.
- The Respondent's agents violated the Complainant's right to freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
- The Respondent's agents violated the Complainant's right to personal liberty.
- The Respondent is vicariously liable for the violations.
- The Respondent shall pay the Complainant UGX 4,000,000 as compensation for violation of the right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (17)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 24
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 44(a)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 23
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 23(1)(c)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 23(4)(a)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 23(4)(b)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 53(2)(b)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 119
- Evidence Act Cap 6 s.101(1)
- Evidence Act Cap 6 s.102
- Police Act Cap 303 s.25
- Prevention and Prohibition of Torture Act 2012
- Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984 Article 1
- Universal Declaration on Human Rights Article 3
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 Article 9(1)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 Article 9(3)
- African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 6
Cases cited (6)
- Fred Tumuramye and Gerald Bwete & Others v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. 264 of 1999)
- Makomberedze v Minister of State (Security) [1987] LRC (Const) 504
- Wintwerp v The Netherlands (1979-80) 2 HRR 387
- Christopher Ssajabi Nsereko v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. 112 of 1999)
- Matiya Byabalema and Others v Uganda Transport Company (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 10 of 1993)
- Bakaliraku Vincent & Another v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. 316 of 2004)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.