Tugumusirize Benon v Attorney General (Complaint UHRC 22 of 2014) [2019] UGHRC 8 (28 October 2019)


## THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA THE UGANDA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION TRIBUNAL HOLDEN AT HOIMA COMPLAINT NO: UHRC/HMA/22/2014

TUGUMUSIRIZE BENON::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: $-AND-$ ATTORNEY GENERAL::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

## DECISION

*[Before; Commissioner Meddie B. Mulumba]*

Tugumisirize Benon a resident of Kisuura C Village, Bwikara Parish. Bwikara Sub County, Kibaale District alleges that at around 3:00 pm on 7/07/2014 while he was at Kisuura C Village, he was arrested by one Binaisa on allegations of murder. That he was taken to Bwikara Police Post where he was detained for one night before being transferred to Kagadi Police Station and detained for three weeks and $4$ days.

Page 1 of 6

This matter came up for $1^{st}$ time hearing on 22/03/2016 before Commissioner Stephen Basaliza. The following issues were framed for determination:-

- I. Whether the Complainant's right to personal liberty was violated by the Respondent's agents? - II. Whether the Respondent is vicariously liable? - III. Whether there are any remedies available to the Complainant?

At the hearing the Respondent was not represented. Examination in chief was carried on the Complainant. The matter was thereafter adjourned to enable the Respondent cross examine the Complainant. On $16/08/2016$ when the matter came up again, the Respondent was absent. On $9/12/2016$ , the Respondent was absent, Commission Counsel proposed that the parties be given an opportunity to have the matter settled. The Complainant proposed a sum of UGX 3,500,000/-. When the matter came up on $3/03/2017$ , Commission Counsel Nambi Jashmin Kasujja informed the Tribunal that efforts at amicable settlement had failed. The matter was then reallocated to me for further hearing. On $11/06/2019$ , cross examination was carried out on the Complainant. This was the close of the Complainant's case. The Respondent did not call defence witnesses but Ebila Hillary Nathan (SA) prayed to file written submissions within three weeks which have not be filed todate.

Page 2 of 6

In regards to Issue I; the Complainant's testimony is that at around $3:00$ pm on $7/07/2014$ while he was at Kisuura Trading Centre he was arrested on allegations of murder. He was then taken to Bwikare Police Post where he was briefly detained for one night. On the next day he was transferred to Kagadi Police Station where he was further detained. He was later released on bond.

Upon cross examination he stated he did not know why his bond was canceled.

The right to personal liberty is guaranteed under Article $23(4)$ (b) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, "the Constitution", which provides that a person who is arrested or detained on suspicion of having committed or about to commit an offence under the laws of Uganda, shall if not earlier released, be brought to Court as soon as possible but in any case not later than 48 hours from the time of his or her arrest.

Exhibit I which is the certified copy of the Lock up register from Kagadi Police Station indicates that he was detained on $08/03/2014$ on allegations of murder vide Serial No 357 KD CRB 26/2014 until $21/03/2014$ when he was granted Police bond which is a period of 13 days.

Page 3 of 6

Any deprivation of personal liberty outside the prescribed instances under Article 23 (4) of the Constitution results in a violation of the right to personal liberty. In the instant case the Complainant was in detention for 13 days therefore his right to personal liberty as protected under Article 23 (4) (b) of the Constitution was infringed upon by the Respondent's agents for 11 days.

## I therefore hold Issue I in the affirmative.

I now turn to Issue II;

After considering the Complainant's evidence and having held Issue 1 in the affirmative, I have no doubt that the Complainant was arrested and detained by Respondent's agents in the course of their employment. The arrest and detention is not denied. I have no hesitation in concluding that all this was done by the agents of the Respondent in course of their employment. I therefore find that the Attorney General is vicariously liable for the acts and omissions of its servants (see Omonyi Rogers and Attorney General & Uganda Revenue Authority HCCS 27 of 2002).

Page 4 of 6

right to personal liberty as protected under Article 23 $(4)$ (b) of the Constitution.

3. The said sum shall carry interest at 10% per annum calculated from the date of the decision until payment in full.

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.

I so order.

Dated at HOIMA this $\frac{28}{2019}$ .

m. Lulul

MEDDIE B. MULUMBA PRESIDING COMMISSIONER

Page 6 of 6