Wakilii

Rajab Mamu v Attorney General [2023] UGHRC 10

Tribunal · 2023 Complaint Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Human rights complaint alleging torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by police officers during arrest and detention
Decision
Complaint allowed; complainant awarded general damages with interest

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 from Kira Road Police Station violated the complainant's constitutional right to freedom from torture when they kicked and beat him with batons during arrest, causing permanent disability. The Attorney General was found vicariously liable. Medical evidence established post-traumatic arthritis and 30% permanent disability. The Tribunal awarded UGX 5,000,000 as general damages, considering the complainant's age, severity of injuries, loss of employment, and the absolute nature of the right under Article 44(a) of the Constitution.

Outcome

Complaint allowed; complainant awarded general damages with interest

Facts

On 15 December 2008, Rajab Mamu, a 68-year-old security guard, was arrested by police officers from Kira Road Police Station on allegations of store breaking and theft. During arrest at Kamwokya Health Centre, he was kicked on the legs and knees and beaten with batons by officers in civilian clothes and uniformed officers from Kamwokya Police Post. He was detained at Kira Road Police Station, then transferred to Mawanda Road Police Station where his statement was recorded. He was charged with theft and store breaking at City Hall Magistrates Court and remanded to Luzira Prison. Due to his deteriorating condition from the beatings, he received treatment at Murchison Bay Hospital. He was released on bail on 2 February 2009 when the case was dismissed for lack of exhibits. Medical evidence showed he sustained an old fracture of tarsal bones, post-traumatic arthritis, neuropathy, muscle wasting, and 30% permanent disability. He lost his employment as a security guard because he could no longer work without a walking stick.

Issues

  1. Whether the complainant's right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was violated by state agents.
  2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any remedies.

Orders

  • The Complaint is allowed.
  • The Respondent is ordered to pay the Complainant a sum of UGX 5,000,000 (Uganda Shillings Five Million only) as general damages for violation of his right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.
  • The general damages shall carry interest at 10% from the date of this decision until payment in full.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Human Rights — Torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment — Constitutional Protection — Article 24 of the Constitution
Article 24 of the Constitution provides that no person shall be subjected to any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and this right is absolute under Article 44(a) of the Constitution.
Human Rights — Torture — Definition — United Nations Convention Against Torture
Torture is defined as an act by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted on a person by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or any other person acting in an official capacity for purposes such as obtaining information, punishment, intimidation or coercion.
Evidence — Medical Reports — Admissibility — Testimony by Qualified Medical Personnel
Where the authors of medical reports cannot be found for any reason, qualified medical personnel available in those facilities are competent enough to testify on those reports and tender them in evidence, as this is precisely the reason hospitals and other related facilities keep records. The requirement that medical reports must be tendered strictly by their authors is too restrictive, unreasonable and an obstacle to dispensing justice.
Human Rights — Torture — Identification of State Agents — Burden of Proof
It is impossible for anyone to know names of every policeman except if they are wearing name tags, which in most cases they do not. A complainant is not required to mention the names of individual police officers to establish that state agents violated his rights where the evidence shows they identified themselves as police officers and acted in that capacity.
Tort Law — Vicarious Liability — State Liability for Acts of Police Officers
Where police officers violate a person's rights while acting in the course of their employment, the Attorney General is vicariously liable for their actions.
Human Rights — Remedies — Assessment of Compensation for Torture
In assessing compensation for torture, the tribunal takes into consideration the magnitude of the injuries sustained, the impact of the injuries on the life of the complainant, and the fact that the right to freedom from torture is absolute under Article 44(a) of the Constitution.

Legislation cited (7)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rajab Mamu v Attorney General 2023 UGHRC 10 (4 September 2023)
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.