[2016] UGHRC 9

[2016] UGHRC 9

The Tribunal found that while the Complainant sustained severe physical pain and suffering, the evidence presented was inconsistent and ambiguous regarding the identity of the perpetrator and the circumstances of the injuries. There was no corroborative evidence to support the claim that the injuries were inflicted...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] UGHRC 9
Parties
Applicant: Mbyemire Wilson; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
Uganda Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Complaint UHRC 83 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Final Decision
Outcome
complaint dismissed
Judges
Joseph A. A. Etima, Commissioner
Legal Topics
Freedom From Torture, Vicarious Liability, Burden of Proof, Compensation for Rights Violation
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Freedom From Torture Vicarious Liability Burden of Proof Compensation for Rights Violation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mbyemire Wilson

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Final Decision

  1. 1 Whether the Complainant's right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was violated by the Respondent's agents/servants.
  2. 2 Whether the Respondent (Attorney General) is liable for the violations against the Complainant's right.
  3. 3 Whether the Complainant is entitled to any remedies.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that while the Complainant sustained severe physical pain and suffering, the evidence presented was inconsistent and ambiguous regarding the identity of the perpetrator and the circumstances of the injuries. There was no corroborative evidence to support the claim that the injuries were inflicted by state agents for the purpose of obtaining a confession. The medical evidence confirmed bodily harm but did not establish that it was caused by police officers or other state agents. The Tribunal concluded that the Complainant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that his right to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was...

Court Disposition

complaint dismissed

Orders

  • The complaint is disallowed and is hereby dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.