Wakilii

Uganda v Costa (HCT-00-ICD-CR-SC 14 of 2022)

High Court · [2023] UGHCICD 17 · 2023 Charges Confirmed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Pre-trial hearing and confirmation of charges for aggravated trafficking in children
Decision
Accused referred for trial before the designated trial panel

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 confirmed two counts of aggravated trafficking in children against a Portuguese national who rented accommodation for a 16-year-old girl's family, shared a bedroom with her, and engaged in sexual intercourse with her against her will. The court held that the accused harbored and received the victim, exploited his financial superiority over her impoverished family, and sexually exploited the victim. Section 3(3) of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act alleviates the need to prove specific means when the victim is a child. The charges were confirmed and the accused referred for trial.

Outcome

Accused referred for trial before the designated trial panel

Facts

A Portuguese national met a tea vendor in Najjera in 2020 and befriended her family. He rented a two-bedroom house and invited the family to move in, occupying separate rooms. He later rented a three-bedroom house where he shared a bedroom with the 16-year-old victim. The accused engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim on several occasions against her will. When the victim reported this to her parents, they took limited action. The accused proposed marriage to the victim, but when her parents refused because she was too young, he expelled the family from the house. Medical evidence showed the victim had a ruptured and healed hymen. The victim's family lived in a wooden house in poor condition before the accused rented better accommodation for them, demonstrating significant financial superiority.

Issues

  1. Whether the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe the accused received and harbored the victim for the purpose of trafficking.
  2. Whether the victim qualified as a child within the meaning of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act.
  3. Whether the accused abused his position of financial power over the victim's family to exploit the victim.
  4. Whether the prosecution established that the accused sexually exploited the victim.
  5. Whether the charges of aggravated trafficking in children should be confirmed and the accused referred for trial.

Orders

  • Charges under Count 1 (aggravated trafficking in children contrary to Section 3(1)(a) and 5(a) of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009) confirmed against the accused.
  • Charges under Count 2 (aggravated trafficking in children contrary to Section 3(1)(a) and 5(a) of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009) confirmed against the accused.
  • Accused referred for trial before the designated trial panel.
  • Proceedings' records and this decision to be forwarded to the Head of the International Crimes Division for the next steps.

Rules and key headnotes

Trafficking in Persons — Harboring and Receiving — Definition and Elements
An act of harboring or receiving a child is complete where there is evidence that the accused allowed or tolerated the presence of minors in his dwelling to facilitate the pursuit of his unlawful intention with them, or in circumstances where had their presence been known by their parents, the parents would have objected, being fully aware of the risks.
Trafficking in Persons — Children as Victims — Proof of Means Not Required
Section 3(3) of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act 2009 alleviates the need to prove specific means in cases involving children as victims of trafficking. The actions of recruiting, transporting, transferring, harboring, or receiving a child for exploitation constitute trafficking in persons, even if these actions do not align with the means specified in subsection (1) of the same section.
Trafficking in Persons — Abuse of Position of Vulnerability — Financial Superiority
Where an accused person uses financial superiority to rent comparatively better apartments for an impoverished family and exploits the victim in the process, this constitutes abuse of a position of vulnerability. A significant financial advantage held by the accused over the victim's family indicates a power imbalance that can be exploited for trafficking purposes.
Age — Proof of Child's Age — Birth Certificate Not Produced
Where a birth certificate is not produced in evidence, a court can gather evidence of age from persons acquainted with the fact of an individual's age, from medical evidence, and from observation of the individual. Consistent statements from family members supporting a victim's age are sufficient to establish that the victim was a child, even where medical evidence suggests a slightly different age.
Pre-Trial Hearings — Standard of Proof — Substantial Grounds to Believe
At the pre-trial stage in International Crimes Division proceedings, the evidential burden and standard of proof required must be robust, concrete, and tangible. The prosecution must demonstrate substantial grounds to believe that the accused committed the charged offences, which equates to strong grounds for believing. The evidence must demonstrate a clear and coherent reasoning connecting the accused to the specific allegations.
Sexual Exploitation — Proof of Penetration — Victim's Testimony and Medical Evidence
Proof of penetration can be established through direct or circumstantial evidence, often relying on the victim's testimony as primary evidence. Medical evidence showing a ruptured and healed hymen can offer corroborative support. Where a victim details instances of sexual intercourse and reports them to parents, and medical evidence is supportive, there are substantial grounds to believe that the accused engaged in sexual exploitation.

Legislation cited (13)

  • Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009 s.3(1)(a)
  • Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009 s.3(3)
  • Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009 s.5(a)
  • Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009 s.2(a)
  • Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, Act No. 6 of 2009 s.2(o)
  • International Criminal Court Act, 2010
  • Judicature (High Court) (International Crimes Division) Rules, 2016 r.6(2)
  • Judicature (High Court) (International Crimes Division) Rules, 2016 r.12(10)
  • Judicature (High Court) (International Crimes Division) Rules, 2016 r.21(1)
  • Children Act s.2
  • Rome Statute art.61(1)
  • Rome Statute art.61(7)
  • Evidence Act

Cases cited (10)

  • Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462
  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 327
  • Uganda v Mukuajohnson (HCT-00-ICD-CR-19-2022)
  • Mamatkulov and Askarov v Turkey (Applications Nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99)
  • Prosecutor v Bosco Ntaganda (ICC-01/04-02/06)
  • Prosecutor v Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui (ICC-01/04-01/07)
  • State v Koch (CC 20/2017)
  • Uganda v Mpagi Didas (HCT-00-ICD-004-2020)
  • Uganda v Kodo (HCT-00-ICD-CR-SC-119-2021)
  • Hussein Bassita vs. Uganda

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Costa (HCT-00-ICD-CR-SC 14 of 2022) [2023] UGHCICD 17 (18 December 2023)
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.