Kasozi v Attorney General [2017] UGHRC 49
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 the complainant's detention for eight days (six days beyond the constitutional 48-hour limit) violated his right to personal liberty under Article 23(4)(b) of the Constitution. The Attorney General was held vicariously liable for the actions of police officers at Nyendo and Masaka Police Stations. The complainant was awarded UGX 2,500,000 as general damages for the unlawful detention.
Outcome
Complaint allowed; complainant awarded compensation for unlawful detention
Facts
On 13 April 2009, Fredrick Kasozi was arrested and detained at Nyendo Police Station on allegations of criminal trespass and later murder. He was detained there for four days until 16 April 2009, when he was transferred to Masaka Police Station where he was detained for an additional four days before being released on police bond. The total detention period was eight days. A police detective at Masaka Police Station reviewed the file and found no merit in the murder allegations, recommending the complainant's release, but it took four days for this to occur. The complainant brought a complaint to the Uganda Human Rights Commission Tribunal seeking compensation for violation of his right to personal liberty.
Issues
- Whether the Complainant's right to personal liberty was violated?
- Whether the Respondent is vicariously liable?
- Whether there is any remedy available to the Complainant?
Orders
- The complaint is allowed.
- The Respondent is ordered to pay to the Complainant a sum of UGX 2,500,000 (Uganda Shillings Two Million five hundred thousand) only as compensation for the violation of his right to personal liberty.
- The said sum shall carry interest at 10% per annum from the date of this decision till payment in full.
- Either party not satisfied with this decision has the right to appeal to the High Court of Uganda within 30 days from the date hereof.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda 1995 Article 23
- 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 53(2)(c)
- Evidence Act s.101
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1976 Article 9
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights 1997 Article 6
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 8
- Uganda Human Rights Commission (Procedure) Rules 1998 Rule 21(4)
Cases cited (7)
- Masha Aggrey v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. 260 of 2002)
- Safati Kiwanuka v Kamuli District Administration [1994-95] HCB 74
- Wagoli Annet v Attorney General UHRR [2008-2011] 74
- Muwonge v Attorney General [167] EA 17
- Thunderbolt Technical Services v Apedu Joseph & KK Security (II) Limited (High Court Civil Suit No. 340 of 2009)
- Adukule Abraham v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. CTR/205/2005)
- Adukule Abraham and Bizimungu Alex v Attorney General (UHRC Complaint No. 205/2005)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.