Uganda v Okello and 2 Others (HCCS 78 of 2018)
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
This is a summing up to assessors in a murder trial, not a final judgment. The judge reviewed the legal principles governing murder prosecutions, the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt, the ingredients of murder under section 189 of the Penal Code Act, and the law on circumstantial evidence and alibi. The judge directed the assessors to consider whether the prosecution had proved participation by the two accused persons who contested the charge, noting that circumstantial evidence must point unequivocally to guilt and be incompatible with innocence. No verdict or orders were recorded in this document.
Outcome
Summing Up (No Final Verdict)
Facts
On 6 September 2017, the body of Acam Salume, a juvenile girl, was discovered in gardens in Omaditok, Ngora Parish, Ngora District. The body showed signs of ritual killing: the face was skinned, eyes removed, mouth cut, chest opened with heart removed, and the body burnt with hot water. The deceased was the daughter of Okello Peter. Two days before the body was discovered, the deceased had been seen with the first and second accused persons, who were clan relatives of the deceased's family. The accused persons fled after the discovery and were arrested three months later in Abim. A first accused person, Elyebu Anthony Isah, pleaded guilty and was convicted. The remaining two accused persons, Okello Lazaro and Akello Joyce Mary, contested participation and raised the defense of alibi. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence including witness testimony and a post-mortem report.
Issues
- Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons participated in the murder of the deceased Acam Salume.
- Whether the circumstantial evidence adduced by the prosecution was sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused persons.
- Whether the defense of alibi raised by the accused persons created reasonable doubt as to their participation in the offence.
Legislation cited (11)
- Trial on Indictments Act s.82(1)
- Trial on Indictments Act s.82(2)
- Trial on Indictments Act s.82(3)
- Trial on Indictments Act s.82(4)
- Trial on Indictments Act s.82(5)
- Trial on Indictments Act s.82(6)
- Penal Code Act s.189
- Trial on Indictments Act s.73(2)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 28(3)(a)
- Evidence Act s.101(1)
- Evidence Act s.101(2)
Cases cited (11)
- Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462
- Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
- Uganda v Bosco Okello [1992-93] HCB 68
- R v Gusambuzi s/o Wesonga (1948) 15 EACA 65
- Abuja in Tajudeen Iliyasu versus The State SC 241/2013
- Byaruhanga Fodori v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2002)
- Musoke v R [1958] EA 715
- Teper v R [1952] AC 480
- Tindigwihura Mbahe v Uganda (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1987)
- R v Tubere s/o Ochen (1945) 12 EACA 63
- Ssekitoleko vs Uganda
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.