Uganda v Aleper (Criminal Session Case No. 110 of 2013)

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 the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused performed a sexual act with the child victim. The mere fact that the accused person and the toddler were naked when the accused placed the child on her belly while drunk did not constitute circumstantial evidence of a sexual act. The accused was acquitted of aggravated defilement but convicted of the lesser offence of acting indecently in public under Penal Code Act s.167(e) for walking about naked and exposing her nudity to children and the public.

Outcome

Accused acquitted of aggravated defilement but convicted of acting indecently in public under Penal Code Act s.167(e)

Facts

On 17 October 2012 at Kakolye village in Moroto municipality, the accused person Aleper Grace Farida, while drunk and naked, was observed by witnesses chanting as children followed her. Witness Maria Akuma saw the accused lie down, take hold of a two-year-old child named Longole Paul, and place the child on her belly. Maria told the accused to release the child and led the accused away. Another witness, Nyankole Lily, was awakened by Maria's shout warning the accused that she was going to hurt the child. Both the accused and the child were naked at the time. Medical examination confirmed the child's age as one year and eleven months but provided no evidence of a sexual act. In her charge and caution statement, the accused stated she did not recall what had happened. Evidence indicated the accused often played with neighbours' children and frequently undressed in public when drunk. The accused was charged with aggravated defilement.

Issues

1. Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused performed a sexual act with the child victim.
2. Whether the accused's conduct of placing the naked child on her belly while she was naked and drunk constituted circumstantial evidence of performing a sexual act.
3. Whether the accused could be convicted of a lesser offence based on the evidence adduced.

Orders

• Accused person acquitted of aggravated defilement.
• Accused person convicted of acting indecently in public contrary to section 167(e) of the Penal Code Act.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (2)

• Penal Code Act s.129(3)(4)(a)(b)
• Penal Code Act s.167(e)

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