Uganda v Kasujja (Criminal Application 17 of 2023)
Observed later treatment
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
Held that where an accused person on bail deliberately absconds and cannot be traced, he waives his constitutional right to be present at trial. The court has discretion under Article 28(5) of the Constitution to order that the trial proceed in the accused's absence where his behavior renders continuation in his presence impracticable. Application granted; trial to proceed without the accused who absconded in December 2021.
Outcome
Trial ordered to proceed in absence of accused who absconded after being granted bail
Facts
The Respondent was jointly charged with seven others in HCT-00-ICD-SC-0003-2018 on charges of Murder, Aggravated Robbery and Aiding and Abetting Terrorism relating to the killing of AIP Andrew Felix Kaweesi, his driver and bodyguard. The Respondent was granted bail vide Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2018. Criminal summons were served at his last known address in Railway Quarters LC1 Port Bell Luzira but he was not found. A warrant of arrest was issued on 2 May 2023 and published in the New Vision on 11 May 2023 without response. The Chairperson LC1 informed police that the Respondent disappeared with his family in December 2021. His brother Zziwa Muzamiru reported the disappearance to Kitintale Police Station. Investigations revealed that the Respondent had allegedly fled to the Democratic Republic of Congo through porous borders. The other seven co-accused persons complied with bail terms and continued reporting. The prosecution applied for the trial to proceed in the Respondent's absence.
Issues
- Whether criminal proceedings in HCT-00-ICD-SC-0003-2018 can continue against the Respondent in his absence.
Orders
- The Respondent has been absconding and it is a deliberate act by the Respondent intended to frustrate the completion of his case.
- The criminal proceedings against the Respondent in the International Crimes Division of the High Court shall continue in the absence of the Respondent.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 139(1)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(1)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(2)(g)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(5)
- Judicature Act Cap. 13 s.14(1)
- Judicature Act Cap. 13 s.33
- Trial on Indictments Act s.14(1)
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 Article 14(3)(e)
- Judicature (High Court) (International Crimes Division) Rules 2016 Rule 16
Cases cited (6)
- Ethan Newry and Regina (Court of Appeal SCCrApp No. 75 of 2010)
- Uganda v Gulindwa Paul (HCT-00-AC-CM-0005-2015)
- R v Hayward [2001] 3 WLR 125
- Uganda v Hon. Herbert Kabafunzaki (Criminal Case No. 0007 of 2017)
- Uganda v Gulindwa Paul and Tumusiime (HCT-00-AC-CM-005-2015)
- Regina v Jones [1972] 1 WLR 887
Cases citing this judgment (2)
How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.