Rajab Mamu v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 56 of 2011) [2023] UGHRC 3 (4 September 2023)


# THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA THE UGANDA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION TRIBUNAL **HOLDEN AT ARUA COMPLAINT NO UHRC/056/2011**

**COMPLAINANT RAJAB MAMU** $\begin{smallmatrix}&&&&&&&&&1\\0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\0&0&0&0&0&0$

$-$ AND-

**RESPONDENT** ATTORNEY GENERAL :::::::::::::::::::

**CORAM:**

$\mathbf{j}$

1. HON. MARIAM WANGADYA

2. HON. COL (RTD.) STEPHEN BASALIZA

3. HON. OMARA APITTA LAMEX

4. HON. SIMEO NSUBUGA

## **DECISION**

The complainant brought this complaint alleging that on 15<sup>th</sup> December 2008, he was arrested by Police Officers attached to Kira Road Police Station on allegations of store breaking and stealing a laptop and machines. He said that during arrest, he was kicked by one of the police officers and he sustained severe injuries on his leg. He further stated **MINIS** that as a result of the kicks, he cannot walk properly for THEUTIONAL AFTER SE . FION

$\mathbf{1}$

$07$ Sur ZUZ3

$\star$

The complainant contended that the actions in issue amounted to violation of his right to protection from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.

$\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{S}}$

The respondent's representative, Ms. Jane Frances Nanvuma denied liability.

#### **Issues**

## The issues for determination by the Tribunal are:

- 1. Whether the complainant's right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment was violated by state agents. - 2. Whether the complainant is entitled to any remedies.

This matter was heard by former Commissioners; Hon Joseph A. A. Etima (RIP) and Hon. Victoria Businge Rusoke. This decision is based on their record of proceedings. Seven hearings were held in which the complainant and his witnesses testified and only the complainant was cross-examined by the Respondent's counsel. The two witnesses to wit: Dr. Kyazze David (CW2) and Atanasi Ntwomwoho (CW3) were not cross-examined.

The respondent never presented any defence witnesses but filed written submissions wherein he moved the tribunal to dismiss the complaint for lack of evidence. The complainant had the duty to prove his case on a balance of probabilities.

- Whether the Complainant's right to freedom from torture or $1.$ cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was violated by state agents - Article 24 of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda provides that "no person shall be subjected to any form of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that no one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Article 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR) of 1986 provides that

"every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited".

The complainant, was at the material time an elderly man. He was kicked and beaten with batons on his legs. The complainant testified that as a result of the beatings he is unable to walk normally and uses a walking stick. He also lost his job which was his only source of income. The expert witness, Dr. Kyazze diagnosed him with post-traumatic arthritis which placed his disability at 30%.

accordingly awards the complainant a $^-\rm of$ $sum$ tribunal The UGX5,000,000/= (Uganda Shillings Five Million only) as general damages for violation of his right to freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

### ORDERS:

- The Complaint is allowed. 1. - The Respondent is ordered to pay the Complainant a sum of UGX $2.$ 5,000,000/= (Uganda Shillings Five Million only) as general damages for violation of his right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. - The general damages shall carry interest at 10% from the date of $3.$ this decision until payment in full. - Each party shall bear their own costs. $4.$

Either party not satisfied with this decision has the right to appeal to the High Court of Uganda within 30 days from the date hereof.

Dated at ARUA this .... $\mathcal{H}$ day of ....... September 2023.

muton

HON. MARIAM WANGADYA **CHAIRPERSON**

$\mathcal{L}$

HON. COL (RTD) STEPHEN BASALIZA **MEMBER**

HON. OMARA APITTA LAMEX **MEMBER**

HON. SIMEO NSUBUGA **MEMBER**

$\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{F}_{\mathcal{F}}}}$

$\mathcal{A}^{\prime}$