Judge faults lawyer, Kira court over stalled appeal
The judge said although Sserujongi’s lawyer applied for the record of proceedings shortly after filing the appeal, he took no further action when the lower court failed to furnish it.
Justice Paul Gadenya Wolimbwa faulted both the defence lawyer and the Kira Chief Magistrate’s Court for frustrating the appeal process. (File photo)
________________
The High Court has dismissed a criminal appeal filed by Wilson Sserujongi after he served his sentence before the case could be heard.
Justice Paul Gadenya Wolimbwa faulted both the defence lawyer and the Kira Chief Magistrate’s Court for frustrating the appeal process.
Sserujongi had appealed against his conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No. 016 of 2021 before the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Kira. However, the ruling does not disclose the offence for which he was charged and convicted.
Justice Wolimbwa dismissed Criminal Appeal No. 051 of 2021 for want of prosecution under Section 44(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Code Act, saying the appeal had remained dormant for years after it was filed in November 2021.
The judge said although Sserujongi’s lawyer applied for the record of proceedings shortly after filing the appeal, he took no further action when the lower court failed to furnish it.
By the time the matter came before the High Court, Sserujongi had completed serving his sentence and had been released from prison.
Wolimbwa said filing a notice of appeal merely marks the beginning of the appellate process and that it is the appellant’s responsibility to ensure the appeal is prosecuted.
“This court does not prosecute appeals on behalf of those who bring them. Where an appellant files an appeal and thereafter abandons it to the registry shelf, he cannot be heard to complain that it was never determined."
The judge also faulted the Kira Chief Magistrate’s Court for failing to prepare and transmit the record of proceedings, saying the omission had frustrated the appellant’s right of appeal.
He said the preparation of court records is a judicial duty, not a favour, and warned that delays in forwarding records have become a recurring problem in criminal appeals, with some appellants completing their prison terms before their appeals can be heard.
Such delays violate Article 28(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time, as well as Article 126(2)(b), which requires that justice shall not be delayed.
Wolimbwa also faulted Sserujongi’s lawyer for failing to pursue readily available remedies, including asking the High Court to compel production of the record, repeatedly following up with the trial court, applying for bail pending appeal or seeking an extension of time.
“For close to three years, he did nothing whatever, while the man who had entrusted him with the appeal sat in prison in the belief that his case was in hand."
The judge observed that the appellant’s right of appeal had been rendered ineffective by the combined failures of the lower court and defence counsel, and clarified that the dismissal should not be interpreted as approval of the lower court’s failure to prepare the record of proceedings.
He said Sserujongi remains free to apply for an extension of time if he wishes to challenge his conviction on grounds that continue to have legal consequences beyond serving his sentence.
Wolimbwa directed the registrar to serve copies of the ruling on the Kira Chief Magistrate and the chief registrar to guide lower courts on the need to promptly prepare and transmit records of appeal.