Wakilii

Uganda v Yusuf Gowon & Ors (High Court Criminal Session Case No. 70 of 2002)

High Court · [2003] UGHC 70 · 2003 Application Granted — Statement Excluded AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Trial within a trial to determine admissibility of a confession statement
Decision
Confession statement excluded; main trial to proceed without the contested statement.

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 excluded a Lugbara-language confession statement attributed to the second accused after finding that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was voluntary. The court identified material inconsistencies in prosecution evidence, unorthodox recording procedures, and evidence that a non-police operative (Olijabo) played a clandestine but significant role in the accused's arrest and interrogation, including threats and inducements. The statement was excluded under sections 24 and 25 of the Evidence Act.

Outcome

Confession statement excluded; main trial to proceed without the contested statement.

Facts

The second accused, Nasuru Gille (A2), was jointly indicted with Major General Yusufu Gowon and another for murder and alternatively kidnapping with intent to murder. During the main trial, the prosecution sought to tender a confession statement in Lugbara attributed to A2. Defence counsel objected, alleging the statement was obtained involuntarily through force, threats, and inducements. The court conducted a trial within a trial. Evidence showed that A2 was arrested on 21 April 2001 in Arua by police and a non-police operative, Alfred Olijabo. A2 was transported to Kampala under restrictive conditions, detained without food, and interrogated. On 23 April 2001, A2 was taken to the office of Inspector Draku Awuziya, where a statement was recorded in Lugbara. A2 testified that Olijabo threatened him with death and displayed a pistol, and that Draku presented him with pre-prepared papers to sign without reading the contents back to him. Prosecution witnesses gave contradictory accounts of who was present during interrogations and the procedure for recording the statement.

Issues

  1. Whether a confession statement attributed to the second accused (Nasuru Gille) was made voluntarily and is admissible in evidence.

Orders

  • Objection by defence counsel upheld.
  • Lugbara confession statement excluded from evidence.
  • Statement ordered not to be admitted as an exhibit.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Confession Statements — Test for Confession
A confession connotes an unequivocal admission of having committed an act which in law amounts to a crime, and must either admit in terms the offence or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offence. The true test is whether the statement is such that in the absence of any explanation or qualification, and in the particular circumstances, it points clearly to the guilt of the maker.
Evidence — Confession Statements — Admissibility — Burden of Proof
No statement by an accused is admissible in evidence against him unless it is shown by the prosecution to have been a voluntary statement. The onus is always on the prosecution to prove the admissibility of any statement by an accused person beyond reasonable doubt. Such onus never shifts to the accused.
Evidence — Confession Statements — Voluntariness — Threats and Inducements
A statement or confession is inadmissible where it has been obtained by force or threats or hope of advantage exercised or held out by a person in authority. The court must consider whether the inducements to which the suspect or accused was subjected were made in such circumstances and were of such a nature as to be likely to cause an untrue admission of guilt to be made.
Evidence — Confession Statements — Recording Procedure — Unorthodox Methods
Where a police officer records a confession statement by first hearing the full story from the suspect, then sitting down together to write the statement rather than recording it sentence by sentence as narrated, the procedure is unorthodox and renders the statement open to inclusion of foreign matter at the instance of the recording officer. A material inconsistency between the officer's testimony that the statement was read back to the accused and the written declaration that the accused read and signed the statement raises serious doubt about whether the accused was made aware of its contents before signing.
Evidence — Confession Statements — Role of Non-Police Operatives
Where prosecution witnesses fail to come clean about the exact role of a non-police operative who played a clandestine but significant part in the arrest, transportation, and interrogation of an accused, and where the accused's evidence raises doubts about that operative's involvement in extracting the confession, the prosecution has not discharged its burden of proving voluntariness beyond reasonable doubt.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (5)

  • Uganda v Yosamu Mutahauzo (1988-90) HCB 44
  • Alli v R (1971) EA 75 (CA)
  • Nayinda s/o Batungwa v R (1959) EA 688 (CA)
  • R v Voisin (1918) 1 KB 531 (Court of Criminal Appeal)
  • Rashid and Another v R (1969) EA 138 (CA)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Uganda v Yusuf Gowon & Ors (High Court Criminal Session Case No. 70 of 2002) [2003] UGHC 70 (20 August 2003)
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.