Wakilii

Uganda v Tako (Criminal Session Case 258 of 1993)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 52 · 1994 Conviction for Manslaughter AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance criminal trial on indictment for murder
Decision
Accused convicted of manslaughter

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 accused sergeant arrested the deceased and others on suspicion of witchcraft and took them to military barracks where he and other soldiers subjected them to severe torture. The deceased died during the night following the torture. The court held that all essential elements of murder were proved except malice aforethought. The doctrine of common intention under section 22 of the Penal Code Act applied because the accused and other soldiers engaged in a common unlawful purpose to torture suspects to extract information. Each participant was deemed to have caused the death. However, the intention was to torture, not to kill, and the implements used were non-lethal, therefore malice aforethought was not established. Conviction entered for manslaughter.

Outcome

Accused convicted of manslaughter

Facts

On 19 January 1992 at Loropi Trading Centre in Moyo District, the accused, a sergeant, and another soldier arrested the deceased Filimoni Pili and Martin Eraga on suspicion of possessing poison or being wizards. They forced the two to run to the NRA Military Barracks at Loropi while beating them with acacia sticks. Upon arrival at the barracks, the accused invited other soldiers to join in beating the suspects. Two women, Aurelia Utuboa and Joyce Adrako, were also brought to the barracks and subjected to beatings. The victims were tied Kandoya style, beaten, boxed, kicked, made to lie in the scorching sun, and burnt with molten jerrycan. The deceased was suspended on a tree, beaten, removed, had red pepper rubbed on his fresh wounds, and a stone the size of a football placed on his neck. At 6 p.m. the victims except Joyce Adrako were locked in a small hut. During the night the deceased groaned in pain and then went silent, having died. The following morning the body was handed to the local RC III Chairman for burial. Military authorities obstructed further investigations and refused to allow a post mortem. The accused admitted taking the deceased to the barracks for interrogation based on reports of witchcraft but denied participating in the torture, claiming he left the barracks before the most severe beatings occurred.

Issues

  1. Whether the deceased Filimoni Pili is dead.
  2. Whether the accused caused the death of the deceased.
  3. Whether the death of the deceased was unlawfully caused.
  4. Whether the accused had malice aforethought when he caused the death of the deceased.

Orders

  • Accused found not guilty of murder.
  • Accused convicted of manslaughter contrary to section 182 of the Penal Code Act.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Law & Procedure — Murder — Essential Elements — Proof Required
To secure a conviction for murder, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt: (1) that the person alleged murdered is dead; (2) that the death was unlawfully caused; (3) that it was caused by the accused; and (4) that the killer had malice aforethought when he caused the death of the deceased.
Evidence — Proof of Death — Medical Evidence — Availability of Other Cogent Evidence
Although medical evidence is the best evidence to prove death and its cause, it is open to court to rely on other cogent evidence where medical evidence is not available.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Common Intention — Doctrine under Section 22 Penal Code — Application
Where two or more persons engage in a common concert to pursue an unlawful purpose and in the course of that endeavour an offence is committed, each of them will be deemed to have committed the offence. Common intention can be gathered from the presence of the accused at the scene and his failure to dissociate himself from the act or omission resulting in the commission of the offence.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Unlawful Killing — Presumption — Rebuttal
In homicide cases, death is presumed to have been unlawfully caused unless it is shown that it was caused by accident or in circumstances which make it excusable. The presumption is rebuttable by the accused leading evidence on the balance of probabilities to show that the death was either accidental or committed in circumstances which make the killing excusable, such as self-defence.
Criminal Law & Procedure — Malice Aforethought — Inference from Conduct — Use of Non-Lethal Weapon
Malice aforethought may be inferred from the conduct of the accused immediately before the commission of the offence, the type of weapon used, the manner in which it was used, and the part of the body on which it was applied. Where death is caused by the use of a non-lethal weapon, the inference of malice aforethought is much less readily drawn.
Evidence — Credibility of Witnesses — Assessment — Minor Inconsistencies
In assessing the credibility of witnesses, consistency or inconsistency is a relevant consideration. Where a witness's evidence contains grave inconsistency, unless satisfactorily explained, it usually but not necessarily results in the evidence being rejected. Minor inconsistency, however, unless it points to deliberate untruthfulness, does not have the same effect. A judge has power to find a witness substantially truthful even though he has lied in some respect.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (8)

  • Leonard Asineath (1963) EA 206
  • Republic v Cheya & Another (1973) EA 500
  • Uganda v Paddy Kalenzi (1989) KLR 233
  • Stanley Manuka v Uganda (1978) HCB 179
  • Alfred Tajar v Uganda (EACA Criminal Appeal No. 167 of 1969)
  • R v Gusambizi Wesonga (1948) 15 EACA 65
  • Festo Shirabu s/o Musunga v R (1955) 22 EACA 454
  • Yoweri Damulira v R (1956) 24 EACA 50

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Tako (Criminal Session Case 258 of 1993) [1994] UGHC 52 (9 May 1994)
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.