Nearly 12 years after he was convicted of aggravated robbery, William Obore won his fight to be declared an innocent man in a landmark decision in which the appellate court apologised to him.
Before they signed off a 17-page judgment, the three Court of Appeal judges who rendered the decision expressed “deep regret that the appellant has been in prison for more than 11 years now from the time he was arrested.”
The chorum of justices Hellen Obura, Catherine Bamugemereire and Christopher Madrama noted that Mr Obore’s appeal that was filed in 2012 was heard over nine years later. His acquittal, they further noted, comes after he has served close to 10 years from the date of his conviction.
“Obviously, the appellant has suffered great injustice. Well aware of the setbacks that this court has suffered in the past, we still make a humble appeal to the registry of this court to fix appeals for hearing on the basis of ‘first in first out’ to avoid such embarrassing scenarios,” the judges wrote.
Wrongful convictions occur when an innocent person is convicted of a crime they did not commit. In Uganda, the causes include inadequate legal representation, police misconduct, and false confessions. Such convictions have serious consequences for the victim as well as their families and communities. They also have broader societal effects such as undermining public trust in the criminal justice system.
Exonerated
On April 16, 2012, Mr Obore was convicted by then High Court Judge Stephen Musota and slapped with a 20-year jail sentence.
In the period between Mr Obore’s wrongful conviction and exoneration, Judge Musota has served on the Appeals court and was recently elevated to the Supreme Court. In January, Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo appointed him the Chief Inspector of Courts.
Dissatisfied with Judge Musota’s decision, Mr Obore appealed against both conviction and sentence on grounds that the trial judge erred in law and fact when he failed to properly evaluate evidence on identification and wrongfully convicted him of the offence of aggravated robbery.
He also appealed the sentence insisting that the trial judge “erred in law and fact when he sentenced the appellant to 20 years of imprisonment, which sentence was without justification.”
In acquitting Mr Obore and ordering his immediate release, the appellate court found the evidence on record leaves some doubt about Mr Obore’s “participation in the offence beyond any reasonable doubt.”
It consequently ruled in his favour. “We conclude that the appellant is not guilty of the offence of aggravated robbery. Had the learned trial Judge carefully and critically evaluated the evidence as pointed out above, he would have so found.”
Details
Mr Obore was indicted, tried and convicted of the offence of aggravated robbery contrary to Sections 285 and 286(2) of the Penal code Act. He was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment.
The High Court heard that on January 6, 2011, at Kanyumu Trading Centre in Kumi District, Mr Obore robbed Anthony Olupot of a motorcycle registration number UDN 468D. It was further alleged that immediately before or immediately after the said robbery, Mr Obore threatened to use a pistol on the victim.
Prosecutors said Mr Obore hired a motorcycle rider, Mr Olupot, to take him to Kanyumu Trading Centre.
They travelled on the same motorcycle and when they reached Kanyumu Town Council, Mr Obore allegedly claimed he couldn’t find his wife there.
Prosecution further alleged that he then asked Mr Olupot to take a different route towards Ngora. While passing Oyalaituk swamp, Mr Obore allegedly requested for a stop so that he could relieve himself but returned wearing a black coat.
Mr Obore, the High Court records show, took out a gun and knife, demanded the victim’s motorcycle or life in Swahili. The scared victim reportedly gave up the motorcycle and ran away. Mr Obore rode off. He was later arrested after a case was filed.
Case
On April 16, 2012, Mr William Obore was convicted by then High Court Judge Stephen Musota and slapped with a 20-year jail sentence for aggravated robbery without evaluate evidence on identification.
