Activists Claim Torture on Rise in Uganda

Florence Ogola

IWPR-trained reporter

Thursday, 19 August, 2010

The link has been copied

Cases of torture across the country are increasing, with the lack of adequate laws making it hard to bring perpetrators to justice, according to human rights activists.

United Nations Office for the High Commissioner for Human Rights, OHCHR, country head, Birgit Gerstenberg, said they had recently documented many instances of the crime and other human rights abuses by the security forces, mainly in northern Uganda and the Karamoja region in the north-east. These cases will be included in a new annual report to be published later this year.

Torture cases had declined in the region since the end of the rebel insurgency five years ago, say activists.

Although the country’s constitution guarantees “freedom from torture, cruel and inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment”, there is no domestic law that criminalises the abuse.

Legislation seeking to explicitly define and outlaw the crime was drawn up in 2009, in cooperation with the Coalition Against Torture, CAT, and the Uganda Human Rights Commission, UHRC, but has not yet made it through parliament.

“Torture in Uganda continues to be a matter of great concern and a pressing human rights challenge,” said Med Kagwa, UHRC chairman, pointing out that 54 per cent of complaints received by his organisation pertain to the use of torture.

James Otto, executive director of Human Rights Focus, HURIFO, a Gulu-based NGO, accused the government of deliberately blocking new legislation to criminalise torture since, he claimed, the main perpetrators are those within state bodies such as the police and national army.

“I think that the omission by government to define torture in our law could have been deliberate,” he said. “And, even after being reminded several times by civil society organisations, they are still reluctant.”

Those within government, however, categorical reject any suggestion that torture is a problem within state bodies.

“There’s no torture either by police or the army,” government spokesman Kabakumba Matsiko told IWPR. “Do not use that word. One thing is that when people are arrested, there may be some small scuffle, but that’s not torture.”

Matsiko insisted that the anti-torture bill in no way implied that torture took place in the country, but said that it was part of a whole framework of measures being discussed within parliament, aimed at redeveloping the country after 20 years of civil war. He denied that the government deliberately wanted to block the bill.

“We don’t want the problems of the past to occur again and this bill is part of it,” he said.

However, legal experts are divided over the benefits of new legislation.

Retired Supreme Court judge George Kanyehamba has been one of the harshest critics of the anti-torture bill since it was put forward in 2009, arguing that the country already has many laws on torture that have never been implemented.

Kanyehamba suggested that a better solution would be to incorporate all anti-torture legislation into the penal code rather than enacting new laws. He rejected the argument that the absence of a formal definition for torture is hindering justice.

“I disagree with those who believe that Uganda needs a new law,” he said. “I have been in court for 14 years but have never heard a person complain that he took a torture case to court and it was not given attention.”

Kanyehamba says that a new law will only cause confusion and, even once enacted, will still fall short when it comes to implementation.

He blamed human rights activists for not fighting for the implementation of the anti-torture laws that already exist – an argument rejected by campaigners such as Nicolas Opiyo, a lawyer from CAT.

“I come from northern Uganda, a region of the country that by now would be in a much worse state if it were not for the NGOs,” he said.

Opiyo insisted that it was extremely difficult to hold individuals to account for torture under the current legislation, and that any move to criminalise torture would be a step in the right direction.

“Once a police officer is accused of torture, the best thing the force does is to transfer him,” said Opiyo. “There is no legal framework to bring to account people who commit acts of torture. All that exists are civil remedies for violations against basic human rights.”

The Uganda People’s Defence Force, UPDF, spokesman Felix Kulayje said that the government did not condone torture by the national army in any way, although he acknowledges that there have been isolated incidents where individual soldiers have been accused of the crime.

“The UPDF routinely cautions its forces not to torture or mistreat those that it detains,” he said. “Anyone found guilty of committing acts of torture, cruel or inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment is arrested and charged.”

Florence Ogola is an IWPR-trained reporter.