Mackenzie Leigh Mathis Spence and Another v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 20 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
The High Court granted bail to two United States citizens charged with aggravated trafficking in children and aggravated torture. The court held that pre-existing medical conditions requiring treatment outside prison constituted exceptional circumstances. The court rejected the prosecution's flight risk argument, noting the applicants were renewing their work permits at the time of arrest and enjoyed the presumption of innocence. Bail was granted despite the gravity of the offences, subject to conditions including cash bail, passport deposit, and travel restrictions.
Outcome
Applicants released on bail pending trial subject to conditions
Facts
The applicants, both United States citizens, were charged with aggravated trafficking in children contrary to section 3(1)(a) of the Trafficking in Persons Act 2009 and aggravated torture contrary to section 5(h), (j), (k) of the Prevention of Torture Act 2012. They applied for bail under Article 23(6)(a) of the Constitution. The applicants presented medical evidence showing pre-existing conditions: the first applicant had a complicated illness requiring specific medication not reliably available in prison, and the second applicant suffered from chronic allergic bronchial asthma incompatible with prison conditions. At the time of their arrest, the applicants were actively renewing their work permits which had expired on 30 November 2022. The prosecution opposed bail on grounds that the applicants were flight risks as foreign nationals with no ties to Uganda, faced serious charges carrying potential death sentences, and had worked unlawfully after permit expiration.
Issues
- Whether the application was properly before the Criminal Division of the High Court or should have been before the International Crimes Division.
- Whether the applicants demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting their release on bail.
- Whether the applicants posed a flight risk as foreign nationals.
- Whether the applicants had substantial sureties to ensure their attendance at trial.
Orders
- Application for bail granted.
- Each applicant to deposit cash bail of UGX 50,000,000.
- Each surety to execute a non-cash bond of UGX 50,000,000.
- Each applicant to deposit their passport with the Deputy Registrar of the High Court Criminal Division.
- Applicants not to travel outside Uganda without express permission of court.
- Applicants to report to the Deputy Registrar of the International Crimes Division of the High Court.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (12)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 23(6)(a)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 23
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(3)(a)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(3)
- Trafficking in Persons Act 2009 s.3(1)(a)
- Prevention of Torture Act 2012 s.5(h)
- Prevention of Torture Act 2012 s.5(j)
- Prevention of Torture Act 2012 s.5(k)
- Trial on Indictment Act s.14
- Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) Practice Directions 2022 Rule 2
- Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) Practice Directions 2022 Rule 5
- Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) Practice Directions 2022 Rule 14(2)
Cases cited (1)
- Uganda (DPP) v Rtd Dr Kizza Besigye (Constitutional Reference No. 20 of 2005)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.