Wakilii

Ssebowa Sulaiman Ismael v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 22 of 2019)

High Court · [2020] UGHCICD 2 · 2020 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for bail pending trial on terrorism charges committed to High Court
Decision
Applicant granted bail on conditions pending trial

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 the applicant was entitled to bail. The constitutional right to apply for bail under Article 23(6)(a) is subject to judicial discretion exercised on the particular circumstances of each case. While Section 15 of the Trial on Indictments Act requires proof of exceptional circumstances, this requirement is directory, not mandatory. The Court must balance societal interests against the presumption of innocence. Where the applicant has a fixed place of abode, substantial sureties including a local LC official, and no history of absconding, bail may be granted on appropriate conditions to secure attendance at trial.

Outcome

Applicant granted bail on conditions pending trial

Facts

The applicant was charged with offences under the Anti-Terrorism Act and committed to the High Court for trial. He was remanded at Luzira Prison from 12 October 2018. He applied for bail stating he had a fixed place of abode in Sebina Zone, Makerere III parish, Kawempe Division, Kampala, where he lived with his wife and three children. He produced five sureties: his wife, his parents, the LC I Vice Chairman of his area who was also his landlord, and a friend. The prosecution opposed bail arguing the applicant had no fixed place of abode as he lived in rented premises and that letters from two sureties in Buikwe were disputed by local LC officials. At the time of the ruling, the pre-trial process had commenced.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted bail pending trial on terrorism charges.
  2. Whether the applicant has a fixed place of abode and substantial sureties.
  3. Whether proof of exceptional circumstances is mandatory before bail may be granted under the Trial on Indictments Act.
  4. Whether the applicant presents a flight risk if released on bail.

Orders

  • Application granted.
  • Applicant admitted to bail on the following conditions:
  • The applicant shall be bound to a cash bond of UGX 3,000,000.
  • Each surety shall be bound in the sum of UGX 10,000,000 not cash.
  • The applicant shall report to the Officer in Charge Anti-Terrorism Police every first Monday of the month.
  • On the same day the applicant will appear before the Registrar of the ICD to renew his bail.
  • The applicant shall not leave Kampala district without prior notice to the OC Anti-Terrorism Police.

Rules and key headnotes

Constitutional Law — Right to Bail — Article 23(6)(a) — Judicial Discretion
The right to apply for bail under Article 23(6)(a) of the Constitution is subject to the discretion of the court, which must be exercised within the rules of reason, justice and the law, taking into account all relevant circumstances without relying on reasons that are not legal.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail — Exceptional Circumstances — Trial on Indictments Act Section 15 — Directory versus Mandatory
The requirement under Section 15 of the Trial on Indictments Act for proof of exceptional circumstances before bail may be granted is directory and not mandatory. In light of the liberal wording of Article 23(6) of the Constitution and Section 15 itself, the court is not compelled to require exceptional circumstances but should weigh the need for such proof on a case-by-case basis.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail — Fixed Place of Abode — Tenancy Not a Disqualification
In a country where the vast majority of urban dwellers are tenants, the fact that an applicant for bail is a tenant and not a homeowner does not constitute a flight risk or adverse factor in determining whether the applicant has a fixed place of abode.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail — Sureties — LC Official as Surety — Credibility
The fact that a Local Council official has offered himself as a surety lends credibility to the applicant's standing. Such a community leader would not offer himself as surety if he did not trust the applicant to be trustworthy and to attend trial.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Bail — Overriding Consideration — Likelihood of Attendance at Trial
The overriding consideration in any bail application is always whether the applicant will appear for trial. Conditions set are aimed at ensuring the accused does not abscond and is compelled to attend trial.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (3)

  • Henry Tumukunde v Uganda (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 52 of 2020)
  • Obua Otima v Uganda (High Court Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 18 of 2005)
  • R v Board of Education [1990] 2 KB 165

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ssebowa Sulaiman Ismael v Uganda (Miscellaneous Application No. 22 of 2019) [2020] UGHCICD 2 (6 December 2020)
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.