What is the rationale for granting bail?
Jun 16, 2009
THE law related to bail has, since 2005, been a subject of keen interest not only in the legal circles but also in the public. The President has on several ocassions in public proposed a legislative solution to make sure that suspects accused of offences
John Mugalula
THE law related to bail has, since 2005, been a subject of keen interest not only in the legal circles but also in the public. The President has on several ocassions in public proposed a legislative solution to make sure that suspects accused of offences like corruption, human sacrifice, treason and defilement do not get bail.
Any attempt to restrict the right to apply for bail must simultaneously be accompanied with more space in the prisons, food, medical services and legal representation, at the cost of the state. The granting of bail is a judicial weapon in reducing congestion in prison and Police cells.
Definitely, the President is disturbed by the fact that persons arrested and charged with grave offences are seen out on the streets barely two days after the arrest. This, to many people, is interpreted as justice denied and to some people it explains the rampant mob justice. The President may be justified in the sense that many jurisdictions create certain nearly unqualified rights to bail for lesser offences and not for grave offences.
However, under the current law, all offences are bailable. But what is the rationale for granting bail? Is it a mistake that most criminal legislations have bail provisions even after conviction? The liberty that the accused person gets from bail can be used to attend to one’s job, business and family. The only person capable of building up his or her defence at a trial may be the accused himself.
In granting bail for grave offences, courts are always guided by a number of factors and this is clearly reflected in rulings. Courts do not act irresponsibly.
They listen and judiciously weigh the evidence and the character of the liberties of citizens, as spelt-out in the Constitution and laws of Uganda.
The remedy to stopping bail for criminal cases lies with more efficient and skilled investigation methods and personnel, plus modernising the judiciary, using the commercial court as a model to beat the backlog of cases.
The amendment to the law of the right to bail should not be hurried. More deliberations should be made among the three arms of the Government. Only then will a well intentioned amendment in the law be derived.
The writer is a lawyer
THE law related to bail has, since 2005, been a subject of keen interest not only in the legal circles but also in the public. The President has on several ocassions in public proposed a legislative solution to make sure that suspects accused of offences like corruption, human sacrifice, treason and defilement do not get bail.
Any attempt to restrict the right to apply for bail must simultaneously be accompanied with more space in the prisons, food, medical services and legal representation, at the cost of the state. The granting of bail is a judicial weapon in reducing congestion in prison and Police cells.
Definitely, the President is disturbed by the fact that persons arrested and charged with grave offences are seen out on the streets barely two days after the arrest. This, to many people, is interpreted as justice denied and to some people it explains the rampant mob justice. The President may be justified in the sense that many jurisdictions create certain nearly unqualified rights to bail for lesser offences and not for grave offences.
However, under the current law, all offences are bailable. But what is the rationale for granting bail? Is it a mistake that most criminal legislations have bail provisions even after conviction? The liberty that the accused person gets from bail can be used to attend to one’s job, business and family. The only person capable of building up his or her defence at a trial may be the accused himself.
In granting bail for grave offences, courts are always guided by a number of factors and this is clearly reflected in rulings. Courts do not act irresponsibly.
They listen and judiciously weigh the evidence and the character of the liberties of citizens, as spelt-out in the Constitution and laws of Uganda.
The remedy to stopping bail for criminal cases lies with more efficient and skilled investigation methods and personnel, plus modernising the judiciary, using the commercial court as a model to beat the backlog of cases.
The amendment to the law of the right to bail should not be hurried. More deliberations should be made among the three arms of the Government. Only then will a well intentioned amendment in the law be derived.
The writer is a lawyer