Turyamureeba Patrick v Attorney General [2017] UGHRC 62
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 right to protection from torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment was violated when military training officers beat him severely based on his regional origin, causing serious physical injuries including prolapsed rectum and loss of bladder control. The Respondent was vicariously liable for the acts of its officers. The complainant proved his case on a balance of probabilities through his testimony and medical evidence, which the Respondent failed to controvert by offering no defence.
Outcome
Complaint allowed with compensation awarded to complainant for torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by military officers
Facts
In May 2009, the complainant, a trainee soldier at Kaweweta Training School, was called by instructor Private Atinyi Oscar along with other trainees from western Uganda. They were taken to Katebere dam approximately 2km away. Atinyi and other officers beat the complainant and fellow western Ugandan trainees indiscriminately using batons throughout the night. The complainant was beaten around the stomach causing his intestines to prolapse and loss of bladder control. He was taken to Bombo Hospital on 1 June 2009, kept on painkillers until 25 September 2009 when he underwent surgery. He was given a pass-out number on 30 December 2009 while still hospitalized and sent on 30 days sick leave. His condition worsened at home and he sought further treatment at Good-Will Imaging Centre in Lyantonde from February to August 2010. Medical examination confirmed prolapsed rectum that was foul-smelling and septic. The Respondent denied liability but offered no defence evidence or submissions.
Issues
- Whether the Complainant's right to protection against torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was violated by the Respondent's agents.
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to compensation for the violation of his rights.
Orders
- Complaint allowed.
- Respondent ordered to pay the Complainant UGX 32,000,000 comprising: UGX 20,000,000 as general damages for violation of right to protection from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; UGX 10,000,000 for further medical treatment; UGX 2,000,000 as exemplary damages.
- Interest of 12% per annum on the award to run from the date of decision until payment in full.
- Parties informed of right to appeal to the High Court of Uganda within 30 days.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 24
- Constitution of Uganda Article 44(a)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 53(2)(c)
- Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.101(1)
- Evidence Act Cap. 6 s.102
- Convention Against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984
Cases cited (3)
- Fred Tumuramye v Gerald Bwete and Others (UHRC Complaint No. 264 of 1999)
- George Asiimwe v Attorney General (HCCS No. 48 of 1997)
- Ongom and Another v Attorney General [1979] HCB 267
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.