Wakilii

Uganda v Balyejusa Bruhan Kalyango alias Masiga (HCT-00-CM-0014-2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCICD 8 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by the State for criminal proceedings to continue in the absence of the accused who jumped bail
Decision
Trial to proceed in absentia against the accused who jumped bail

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 High Court held that where an accused person of full age and sound mind, who has been granted bail and adequately notified of trial dates, deliberately absconds by relocating from known residences and becoming uncontactable, he waives his right to be present at trial. Such conduct renders the continuation of proceedings in his presence impracticable under Article 28(5) of the Constitution. The court granted the State's application for the criminal trial to proceed in the accused's absence, finding that allowing accused persons to frustrate proceedings by absconding would be against public policy and would deny justice to co-accused, victims, and the public.

Outcome

Trial to proceed in absentia against the accused who jumped bail

Facts

The respondent was jointly indicted with seven others on two counts of murder, one count of aiding and abetting terrorism, and one count of belonging to a terrorist organisation. He was granted bail on 6 August 2019 on condition that he report to court every 19th day of the month and attend all hearings. The respondent last appeared in court on 6 June 2024. When the trial was scheduled for 31 March 2025, he failed to appear. Criminal summons were issued and served at his known residences, but police found he had sold his house and relocated to unknown locations. One surety testified he last heard from the respondent in December 2024 or January 2025 and could not locate him. A warrant of arrest was issued and published in newspapers and announced on radio, but the respondent remained at large. The State applied for the trial to proceed in his absence.

Issues

  1. Whether criminal proceedings against an accused person who has jumped bail can proceed in his absence.
  2. Whether the application is competent in law given the provisions cited by the applicant.
  3. Whether ordering a trial in absentia violates the accused's constitutional right to a fair hearing under Article 28 of the Constitution.
  4. Whether the accused's conduct in absconding constitutes a waiver of his right to be present at trial.

Orders

  • Application granted.
  • Criminal proceedings against the respondent in High Court International Crimes Division Criminal Case HCT-00-ICD-SC-0002-2018 shall proceed in his absence.

Rules and key headnotes

Trial in Absentia — Accused Who Jumps Bail — Waiver of Right to Be Present
An accused person of full age and sound mind who is granted bail, adequately notified of trial dates, and deliberately absconds by relocating from known residences and becoming uncontactable waives his right to be present at trial and the trial may proceed in his absence.
Right to Fair Hearing — Article 28(5) — Conduct Rendering Proceedings Impracticable
Under Article 28(5) of the Constitution, a trial may proceed in the absence of an accused person where that person conducts himself in a manner that renders the continuation of proceedings in his presence impracticable. Deliberate absconding from court after being granted bail constitutes such conduct.
Trial in Absentia — Public Policy Considerations
It is against public policy to permit the frustration of court proceedings by accused persons who have voluntarily absconded. Allowing accused persons to evade prosecution and delay proceedings would undermine the state's ability to administer justice effectively and would deny justice to co-accused, victims, and the public.
Trial in Absentia — Factors to Consider
In determining whether to proceed with a trial in the absence of an accused, the court should consider: the nature and circumstances of the accused's conduct in absenting himself and whether it was deliberate and voluntary; the seriousness of the offence; the public interest and the interests of victims and witnesses in a trial within a reasonable time; the effect of delay on witnesses' memories; and where there are co-accused who have not absconded, the undesirability of separate trials and the right of those present to a fair and speedy trial.
Applications — Competence — Citation of Wrong Provision
Where an application omits to cite any law at all or cites the wrong law, but the jurisdiction to grant the order sought exists, the irregularity or omission can be ignored and the correct law inserted. The administration of justice requires that the substance of the dispute be investigated and decided on its merits.

Legislation cited (21)

Cases cited (12)

  • R v Hayward [2001] 3 WLR 125
  • Uganda v Hon Herbert Kabafunzaki (HCC No. 7 of 2017)
  • Uganda v Gulindwa Paul and Tumusiime (HCT-00-AC-CM-0005-2015)
  • Regina v Jones [1972] 1 WLR 887
  • Prosecutor v Joseph Kony (ICC-02/04-01-05)
  • Uganda v Kanyamunyu Mathew Muyogoma and 2 Others (Criminal Session Case No. 39 of 2017)
  • Ethan Newry v Regina (SCCrApp No. 75 of 2010)
  • Uganda v Kasujja Shafiq [2023] UGHCICD 13
  • Tarlol Singh Saggu v Roadmaster Cycles (U) Ltd (CACA No. 46 of 2000)
  • Uganda v Gulindwa Paul and Tumusiime [2015] UGHCACD 2
  • R v Abrahams (1985) 21 VLR 343
  • Diaz v United States 223 US 442 (1912)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Balyejusa Bruhan Kalyango alias Masiga (HCT-00-CM-0014-2025) [2025] UGHCICD 8 (14 July 2025)
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.