Implications of HREA Actions in Recent Legal Cases
Explore real-life examples of Human Rights Enforcement Act (HREA) actions in recent court cases, including instances of torture, abuse of rights, and nullification of trials. Uncover how the HREA has been invoked to protect individuals from violation of their fundamental rights and ensure fair legal proceedings.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Examples of HREA action)
This Act has been invoked, e.g. in: Wanyoto v Sgt Ouma and Another (2022) (Egonda JJA), the COA declared Sgt Ouma (an investigating officer) s torturous acts that included inserting sticks tied with rubber band between one of the accused (A4- Kantu Allan) s fingers, commonly known as baibbuli , coercing him to hand over his certificate of title that would be eventually sold to the Appellant, violated his non derogable right from torture (Art 24 and 44(a) of the Constitution. The COA nullified appellant and Kantu Allan s charges in HC Anti-Corruption Division Criminal Case No. 75 of 2019.
- See also Asiimwe and Another v Attorney General and 2 Others (2022) (Gidudu J) The Court relied on Dr Kizza Besigye & 10 Ors v The Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 7 of 2007) [2009] UGCC 3 (1 September 2009) that found that; [C]ourt cannot sanction any continued prosecution of the petitioners where during the proceedings the human rights of the petitioners have been violated......No matter how strong the evidence against them may be, no fair trial can be achieved and any subsequent trials would be a waste of time and abuse of court process nullified their trial with two others, for abuse of office c/s 11(1) of the Anti- Corruption Act, 2009, Act 6/2009; Theft c/ss 254(1) and 261 Penal Code Act, Cap 120; and Conspiracy to commit a felony c/s 390 Penal Code Act: stealing USD 410,000 from GAK Express Co. Limited on 28/2/2021 while working as URA employees; acquitted them u/s 11 (2) HREA, 2019; awarded both General and Punitive damages: A1 200M /= and 50M, and A2 100M /= and 50M against the AG and URA jointly and severely.
See also: Uganda v MI (2023),(Mutonyi J) the learned Judge declared the intended trial a nullity u/s 11(c ) HREA, 2019 before arraigning the minor The Court found: the prosecution s acts of charging the 17-year-old minor with a more serious and wrong offence of Trafficking a 13-year girl child c/s 5(a) of the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2009, Act 7 of 2009, yet he had been arrested for simple defilement regarding the child to child sex; and the compulsory medical examination PF 24 A results that confirmed his age also indicated that he sustained head, neck, abdominal and upper back bruises and upper and lower limbs tenderness due to his body assault a day or two after his arrest, all amounted to both psychological and physical torture of this juvenile offender in contravention of s 2(2)(a) of Torture Act, 2012, Act 3 of 2012 . the Prevention and Prohibition of
