Uganda v A1 - W.A alias X , A2 -S.A alias KE alias A3 ..K.H alias H alias T.L (HCT-00-CR 143 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.

Holding

Held that juvenile offenders who plead guilty to murder and aggravated robbery are subject to a maximum custodial sentence of three years under the Children Act s.94(g), even where the offences carry the death penalty for adults. The age of criminal responsibility is determined at the time of commission of the offence, but offenders who have attained the age of eighteen at the time of sentencing must serve custodial sentences in adult detention centres under s.94(6)(a). Three-year custodial sentences ordered on each count, to be served concurrently, less time on remand. Sentences to be served at Kitalya Maximum Prison.

Outcome

Three juvenile offenders sentenced to three years' custodial detention on each count to run concurrently, less eight months and twenty-five days spent on remand, to be served at Kitalya Maximum Prison

Facts

On 13 May 2022, three juveniles and others at large murdered Ejoku Elias at Kitintale Zone Seven, Nakawa Division, Kampala, by hitting him with a paver during a robbery. They stole his laptop and mobile phone and withdrew UGX 70,000 from his phone. The accused were initially treated as adults because their PF24A forms indicated they were adults. Following complaints, medical examination by radiologist Dr. A.S. Kiwanuka on 14 December 2022 established that all three were below eighteen years at the time of the offence based on unfused knee joint bones. They had dropped out of primary school between Primary Four and Primary Six and were engaged in informal work. They pleaded guilty to murder and aggravated robbery. A second medical examination on 14 June 2023 by radiologists at Mulago Hospital established that all three had attained the age of eighteen by the time of sentencing, based on fusion of wrist and knee ossification centres.

Issues

1. What is the appropriate disposition order for juvenile offenders who plead guilty to murder and aggravated robbery where the offences carry the death penalty for adults?
2. At what point in time should the age of the offenders be determined — at the time of commission of the offence or at the time of sentencing?
3. Whether juveniles who have attained the age of eighteen at the time of sentencing should serve custodial sentences in adult detention centres.

Orders

• All three accused found guilty of murder contrary to s.188 of the Penal Code Act and aggravated robbery contrary to s.285 of the Penal Code Act on their own plea of guilty.
• Each of the three juvenile offenders sentenced to three years' custodial detention on each count.
• The period spent on remand (eight months and twenty-five days) to be deducted from the sentence.
• Balance of two years, three months and five days to be served.
• Sentences on both counts to run concurrently.
• Custodial sentences to be served at Kitalya Maximum Prison.
• Offenders have no right of appeal against the finding of guilt but retain the right to appeal against the legality and severity of the disposition order within fourteen days.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Penal Code Act s.188
• Penal Code Act s.285
• Children Act s.88
• Children Act s.94
• Children Act s.94(6)(a)
• Children Act s.104
• Children Act s.104(3)
• Children Act s.104A

Cases cited (2)

• Uganda v C.B (a juvenile) (Criminal Session No. 177 of 2017)
• Uganda v O.D (a juvenile) (Criminal Session No. 80 of 2018)

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