Wassaja and Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2011)

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.

Holding

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge had in fact considered the appellants' mitigating factors, including their status as first time offenders and the remand period, contrary to the appellants' contention, so the sentence was not illegal under article 23(8). However, applying the principle of uniformity and consistency in sentencing with comparable murder cases, the Court found the 50 year sentence harsh and excessive in the circumstances. It set aside the sentence and substituted a sentence of 35 years imprisonment for each appellant, to run from the date of conviction.

Outcome

Sentence of 50 years set aside and substituted with 35 years imprisonment for each appellant, running from date of conviction

Facts

The appellants gained access to the deceased's house through a window and used a piece of cloth to cover her mouth and nose, strangling her to death. The first appellant then went to the room of the deceased's daughter, Nanono Pauline, demanded money and threatened to kill her, then raped her while slapping her with a knife. After these acts the appellants left. They were arrested, charged, tried and convicted of murder contrary to sections 188 and 189 of the Penal Code Act, and each sentenced to 50 years imprisonment. The appellants had been in custody since 2008, approximately four years on remand. They appealed against sentence only, contending the sentence was manifestly harsh and that mitigating factors and the remand period had not been considered.

Issues

1. Whether the trial judge imposed a manifestly harsh and excessive sentence by sentencing the appellants to 50 years imprisonment for murder.
2. Whether the trial judge failed to take into account the appellants' mitigating factors, including their status as first time offenders and the remand period, rendering the sentence illegal under article 23(8) of the Constitution.

Orders

• Sentence of 50 years imprisonment for each appellant set aside.
• Each appellant sentenced to 35 years imprisonment, to run from the date of conviction.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (6)

• Penal Code Act s.188
• Penal Code Act s.189
• Trial on Indictments Act s.132(1)(b)
• Constitution of Uganda art.23(8)
• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.11
• Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions 2013 Guideline 6(c)

Cases cited (17)

• Abaasa Johnson v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2010)
• Ederema Tomasi v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 554 of 2014)
• Rwabugande Moses v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2014)
• Fr. Narsensio Begumisa and 3 Others v Eric Tibebaga (Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2002)
• Kifamunte Henry v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 1997)
• Bogere Moses v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
• Kiwalabye Bernard v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 2001)
• Friday Yasin v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 2021)
• Livingstone Kakooza v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1993)
• Mbunya Godfrey v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2011)
• Wamutabanewe Jamiru v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 74 of 2007)
• Nkonge Robert v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 148 of 2009)
• Semanda Christopher & another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 77 of 2010)
• Aharikundira Yustina v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 2015)
• Adupa Dickens v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 267 of 2017)
• Bakubye Muzamiru and Another v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 56 of 2015)
• Okello Geoffrey v Uganda (Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2014)

Cases citing this judgment (5)

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.

• Uganda v Nuwabiine and Others (Criminal Sessions Case 241 of 2022)
• Uganda v Atwijukire (Criminal Session Case 638 of 2019)
• Uganda v Atwijukire (Criminal Session Case 638 of 2019)
• Uganda v Ainomugisha and Others (Criminal Session Case 119 of 2019)
• Uganda v Ainomugisha and Others (Criminal Sessions Case 119 of 2019)

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