TOP
Wednesday,August 21,2019 06:31 AM
  • Home
  • News
  • Does Katuramu really deserve life out of prison?

Does Katuramu really deserve life out of prison?

By Admin

Added 5th February 2016 12:30 PM

Instead of continuing with discussion and debate, Katuramu decided to kill Kiijanaangoma. Was that good or fair? Kiijanaangoma cannot be brought back to life.

Kajabagokarusoke 703x422

Kajabago – Ka – Rusoke is a lecturer at the National Leadership Institute,

Instead of continuing with discussion and debate, Katuramu decided to kill Kiijanaangoma. Was that good or fair? Kiijanaangoma cannot be brought back to life.



By Kajabago – Ka – Rusoke

John Katuramu is in Luzira prison because he was found to have killed Happy Kiijanaangoma in 1999. He was then the prime minister of Tooro kingdom.

There was disagreement between him and Kiijanaagoma on how Tooro kingdom should be run.

Instead of continuing with discussion and debate, Katuramu decided to kill Kiijanaangoma. Was that good or fair? Kiijanaangoma cannot be brought back to life.

Katuramu is alive in prison while Kiijanaangoma is in grave, dead. Compare. Kijanaangoma is neither happy nor sad, neither feeling pain nor pleasure. Because he is dead.

Katuramu is sad and feeling pain in prison because he is alive and unhappy about how he is being treated when he is still alive. Compare.

He wants to continue living when the other one is dead. He does not regret about the other one he killed who also would want to continue living as he himself. Katuramu wants to continue living.

The answer for his own feelings is that he should be released so that he continues living happily as he was living before when the one he killed can continue in the grave.

There are those who want him out of prison so that he enjoys good life but do not take into account the fact that there are also those others who wish that the one he killed should have come out of the grave.

He can get out of prison but the other one cannot come out of the grave. Compare?

Courts of Law found the one in the grave innocent. That was why they put Katuramu in Prison.

The one in the grave cannot plead for release from the grave when Katuramu can plead for release from prison, because the killer is alive when the dead is indeed dead and has no power.

This is real teasing of the dead, meaning: “I killed him. Why should I suffer simply because I killed him? After all I, in prison or not, he will never come back. I did what I wanted to do. Come what may. All that I want is to enjoy life out of prison.  For him, now in the grave, that is his own irreversible fate. But I should be released. That is all.”

Analysis


Mistakes can be made. For example, man or woman slaughter, is not necessarily Organised. It is out of anger and spontaneous. The offender may afterwards even regret why he or she did what he or she did. Murder is different.

Because the offender utilised the category of time planning the act. He or she was fully conscious of what should be implemented. Such a person is subjected to coercive organs of the state apparatus, namely, Police, for arrest, prison, for confinement, and judiciary for assessing the nature of what is considered a negative social act and, finally, sentenced to a particular type of punishment according to the nature of the offence.

Nature of purnishment

Can be: (i) Imprisonment for a short given period of time.(ii) Life imprisonment
(iii) Death sentence.

Prison should be subjected to ethics.

First and foremost anybody heading a state in the world should be thoroughly clear in the subject matter of Ethics.

One who is imprisoned can be either wrong or right according to the ideology or ethics of those in whose hands the state apparatus is. For example, how is a guerrilla fighter defined by those in power?

In case of Uganda, right or wrong will depend on the type of Ethics regarded correct by the party in power.

The concept of the need to subject prison to ethics is that it is not enough to just imprison people. It is also necessary to attend to them constantly concerning spiritual life which can change them towards being better beings so that, may be, finally they can come to see and realise how wrong they were when they actually committed crime.
It is not correct to flock them like cattle, sheep or goats which have tampered with domestic gardens. They are human beings which have made social mistakes unconsciously.

Care should be strictly taken however that they should not be forced to confess during lessons in Ethics. It should be left to individuals who may realize how wrong they were in terms of their crimes.

Those who feel really morally guilty and sorry, should be released as continuing confining them when they are already spiritually repentative, clear and, clean, will be tantamount to abusing innocence and, finally we in power, qualifying as morally, ethically and, spiritually. Incorrect. Then those who are spiritually stunted and rigid should undergo the respective punishments to which they were sentenced.

On proved killers

Any previously proven killer or murderer who has never confessed should not be released. This applies to especially those who were very rich before their crimes and have now sold their property while in prison and have bribed a big number of their tribes people who are supporting them so that they are released.

Releasing of prisoners should not be based on politics but on Ethics and Moral standards so that even those who are being bribed to call for the release of a non – repentant criminal can come to their senses that they are now allies to the wrong and should repent over the same. There should not be any appeal by others for forgiveness concerning one who has not repented. For even the one releasing a non – repentant criminal is an accomplice to criminality.

The writer is a lecturer at the National Leadership Institute, Kyankwanzi


Related Articles

More From The Author

Related articles