Rwakafuuzi should have done more to save Saidi Lutaaya’s life

Ladislaus Kiiza Rwakafuuzi

What you need to know:

  • The options. In my view, at the time of Saidi Lutaaya’s arrest and failure to present him to a court of law, Rwakafuuzi should have swiftly acted and used the existing international mechanisms such as the UN special mechanisms by writing to the working group on arbitrary detention and cause them to issue an urgent appeal to the authorities in Uganda to either present the accused person in a court of law or have him released immediately.

Reference is made to an opinion piece titled ‘Our Judiciary not conscious of its duty to safeguard human rights’ by Ladislaus K Rwakafuuzi in the Daily Monitor of May 11, 2018. While I sympathise with the family of the late Saidi Lutaaya, I think Rwakafuuzi portrays a situation of hopelessness and despair once a country’s systems (Justice, Law and Order sector) are not working to the interests of its people or such victims and yet there are options.

I think that as a learned human rights lawyer, Rwakafuuzi is aware of both regional and international mechanisms for the protection of human rights. Uganda being a signatory to and party to the International of Bill Human Rights (UDHR, ICCPR, ICESCR), has an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil human rights.

In my view, at the time of Saidi Lutaaya’s arrest and failure to present him to a court of law, Rwakafuuzi should have swiftly acted and used the existing international mechanisms such as the UN special mechanisms by writing to the working group on arbitrary detention and cause them to issue an urgent appeal to the authorities in Uganda to either present the accused person in a court of law or have him released immediately.
He could also have brought the matter to the attention of the working group on enforced or involuntary disappearances since the said victim was detained in ungazetted detention facility - JATT headquarters.

Other options would have been to appeal to the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment.
Alternatively, the Committee against Torture as a treaty body would have intervened after exhaustion of the local remedies available.
Even having knowledge of the fact that the deceased was extra judicially killed, he should have brought the matter to the attention of the special rapporteur on Extra judicial, summary or arbitrary executions.
The outcome of such appeals once done in timely manner, would have probably saved the life of Lutaaya as opposed to reacting after his death.

No sane government would wish to see its name publicised as a subject of extra judicial killings or any other human rights violations before the UN Human Rights Council as the case would have been.
The issuance of an urgent appeal to the authorities within Uganda would have caused the State to release the deceased or parade him before a court of law and follow due process due to such worldwide publicity that such mechanisms have.

Lukuse, whom Rwakafuuzi believes has nowhere to run, still has avenues to seek redress or remedy. She can be helped to present her case to the Human Rights Committee, the treaty body that monitors government’s compliance with the international treaty on civil and political rights!
After all, from the said story, it is clear that all available local remedies had been exhausted.

It is important that people who have had the privilege of getting an education help those who haven’t had such privilege or opportunity to access justice through use of such knowledge and information.
These approaches are free but require time although time and advice are a lawyer’s stock of trade!

Mr Kirenga works with National Coalition of Human Rights Defenders-Uganda.