Mauritius, South Africa and Uganda.

507 Pages·2009·3.69 MB·English

LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL

TRIBUNALS AND SELECTED AFRICAN JURISDICTIONS–

MAURITIUS, SOUTH AFRICA AND UGANDA

BY
JAMIL DDAMULIRA MUJUZI
LLB (Hons) Makerere University; LLM (Human Rights and
Democratisation in Africa), University of Pretoria; LLM
(Human Rights Specialising in Reproductive and Sexual Heath
Rights), University of the Free State

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the
degree Doctor of Law in the Faculty of Law of the University of
the Western Cape, South Africa

Promoter:
Professor Lovell Fernandez
Faculty of Law
University of the Western Cape

13 May 2009
DECLARATION

I, Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi, declare that Life Imprisonment in

International Criminal Tribunals and Selected African Jurisdictions –

Mauritius, South Africa and Uganda is my work and that it has not been
submitted for any degree or exam ination in any other university or
institution. All the sources used, referred to or quoted have been duly
acknowledged.

Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

Signed...........................

13 May 2009

ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am deeply indebted to my Promoter, Professor Lovell Fernandez, of the

Faculty of Law, University of the Western Cape, for his guidance during

the writing of this thesis and for his useful, critical and always prompt

comments on my drafts. His encouraging words and the trust he put in me
made me work harder than probably I would have done without them. I am
indebted to Professor Julia Sloth-Nielsen of the Faculty of Law, University
of the Western Cape, who encouraged me to undertake LLD studies at the
University of the Western Cape, who suggested to me that life
imprisonment was a question worth investigating for an LLD thesis, who
was very instrumental in fundraising for my studies, who looked for the
funds that enabled me to have access to Mauritian case law, who assured
me that with dedication I could finish my LLD in the shortest time possible,
and who encouraged me to publish as many articles as possible from my
research. Professor I. Solly Leeman, thank you so much for your excellent
editorial assistance.
I am grateful to Mr. Lukas Muntingh, Coordinator, Civil Society Prison
Reform Initiative, Community Law Centre, University of the Western
Cape, for accepting me as a Doctoral Researcher in the Project for three
years, for fundraising for the project, for allowing me sufficient time to
concentrate on my LLD research and also for availing me all the stationery
I needed for my research.
I am grateful to the staff of the Community Law Centre who made my stay
at the Centre conducive for my studies. Prof. Nico Steytler, the Director,
thanks for all you did for me. Ms Trudi Fortuin, Officer Manager, your
iii
excellent administrative support made my work easier; Mrs Jill Claassen,

Librarian, thanks for all the books, journal articles and other research

materials you put at my disposal without which my research would have

taken longer or even not completed; Ms Virginia Brooks, Accountant, and

Ms Jody Bevie, Book keeper, for making sure that I got paid on time; all
the researchers and the student assistants for your support. Benyam
Mezmur, Douglas Singiza, Rebecca Amollo, Dr. Yonatan Fetsha, Dr. Lilian
Chenwi, Siyabonga Helebe and Annette May, thank you all for your
support. Members of the LLD Discussion Group, thank you so much for
your comments during the discussions. Solomon Kirunda I thank you so
much for the Odoki Commission Report. Ford Foundation and Open
Society Foundation - South Africa’s funding to the Community Law Centre
and Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative is acknowledged.
My family in Uganda was very supportive during the years I have been
thousands of kilometres away from them studying for my LLD. My mother,
Mukyala Sarah Namakula Ddamulira, my father Mwami Ali Ddamulira,
my sisters, brothers and my other relatives I will always be indebted to you.
Thank you so much for the SMSs and for the phone-calls which kept me
going. I thank all my South African and Ugandan friends for their support
during my studies.
I am grateful to the Uganda Prisons Service and in particular to Mr Asinjah
Baker and Mr. Robert Omita Okoth for availing me all the information I
needed for this research relating to Uganda Prisons and to prisoners serving
life imprisonment in Uganda. I am grateful to the following people who
availed me all the information I needed from Mauritius in one way or
iv
another: Mr. Vishnu Hanumunthadu, Acting Assistant Commissionrt of

Prisons; Dr. Pushpawant Boodhun, Secretary and Chief Executive,

Mauritius National Human Rights Commission; Justice Asraf Caunhye,

Judge of the Supreme Court of Mauritius; and Ms Smita Lallah, Secretary

of Mauritius Bar Association.

v
DEDICATION

To my beloved mother, Mukyala Sarah Namakula Ddamulira, who did all

she could, sometimes in the most challenging of circumstances, for me to

attain an education.

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration....................................................................................................ii

Acknowledgments........................................................................................iii

Dedication.....................................................................................................vi

Table of
contents........................................................................................................vii

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

1. Background to the study....................................................................1
2. Statement of the problem...................................................................4
3. Aims of the study...............................................................................6
4. Methodology......................................................................................7
5. Limitations of the study.....................................................................8
6. Outline of the study...........................................................................9

CHAPTER II
APPRAISING PUNISHMENT FROM A PHILOSOPHICAL
PERSPECTIVE

2.
Introduction.................................................................................................11
2.1. ‘African philosophy’ and punishment.............................................12
2.1.1. The concept of punishment in ancient Africa....................................13
2.1.2. Is there African philosophy?..............................................................17
2.2. The punishment debate.........................................................................20
2.3. Punishment defined..............................................................................21
vii
2.4. The three major theories in the punishment debate..............................36

2.4.1. Retribution.........................................................................................36

2.4.1.1. Moral justification of punishment..................................................37

2.4.1.2. Guilt and punishment: why punish the innocent............................39

2.4.1.3. Punishing the punishable................................................................41
2.4.1.4. Freedom of will versus determinism..............................................43
2.4.2. Retribution and distribution of punishment: how much should we
punish?......................................................44
2.4.2.1. Is retribution the same as revenge?.................................................45
2.4.2.2. Is retribution inhumane?.................................................................50
2.4.2.3. Can retribution be freed of the ‘eye for an eye’ approach?............51
2.4.2.4. The principle of equality as viewed by Mabbott............................54
2.4.2.5. Does retribution justify torture?....................................................56
2.4.2.6. The right to be punished.............................................................58
2.4.3. Utilitarianism/deterrence...................................................................68
2.4.3.1. Utilitarianism and justification of punishment...............................69
2.4.3.2. Ethical arguments underpinning utilitarianism: the principle of
equality.......................................................70
2.4.3.2.1. Act and rule utilitarianism...........................................................71
2.4.3.3. Forward-looking approach.............................................................73
2.4.3.3.1. Where punishment is groundless.................................................75
2.4.3.3.2. Where punishment is inefficacious..............................................76
2.4.3.3.3. Where punishment is unprofitable...............................................80
2.4.3.3.4. Where punishment is needless.....................................................82
2.4.3.4. Challenges to measuring happiness................................................82
2.4.3.5. Does deterrence reduce crime?.......................................................84
2.4.3.6. Attempts to resolve the antimony between retribution and
deterrence...................................................86
viii
2.4.4. Rehabilitation.....................................................................................87

2.4.4.1. Offender has a right to be punished................................................92

2.4.4.2. Indeterminate incarceration............................................................93

2.4.4.3. Punishment incompatible with rehabilitation.................................95

2.4.5. Towards reconciling retribution, deterrence and rehabilitation.........98
2.5. Conclusion: going beyond Taylor......................................................103

CHAPTER III
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS AND LIFE
IMPRISONMENT

3. Introduction...........................................................................................105
3.1. The Nuremberg Tribunal: Establishment and punishment.................106
3.1.1. The Nuremberg Tribunal and the purpose/objectives of punishment
in cases of life imprisonment...........................109
3.2. The Tokyo Tribunal: Establishment and punishment.........................115
3.2.1. The Tokyo Tribunal and justification of punishment in cases of life
imprisonment..................................................117
3.3. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
(ICTY): Establishment and punishment............120
3.3.1. The ICTY and life imprisonment....................................................123
3.3.2. The ICTY and objectives of punishment in the case of life
imprisonment..................................................125
3.4. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR):
Establishment and punishment.......................132
3.4.1. The ICTR and life imprisonment.....................................................133
3.4.2. The ICTR and imprisonment for the remainder of the offender’s
life................................................................137
3.5. Life imprisonment under the Special Court for Sierra Leone
(SCSL)..........................................................163
ix
3.6. Life imprisonment under the International Criminal Court (ICC).....166

3.7. Conclusion..........................................................................................170

CHAPTER IV

LIFE IMPRISONMENT IN SOUTH AFRICA, MAURITIUS AND
UGANDA: HISTORY AND MAJOR LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS

4. Introduction...........................................................................................171
4.1. The different approaches to the sentence of life imprisonment in
domestic jurisdictions.......................................................171
4.2. History of life imprisonment in South Africa, Mauritius and
Uganda................................................................174
4.2.1. South Africa.....................................................................................175
4.2.1.1. Life imprisonment during the imposition of the death penalty (1906
– 1994)..................................................................176
4.2.1.2. Life imprisonment in the aftermath of the abolition of the death
penalty (1995 – 1997)...................................................189
4.2.1.2.1. The Constitutional Court supervised sentences........................190
4.2.1.2.2. Life sentences not directly supervised by the Constitutional Court
in the aftermath of the abolition of the death penalty but prior to the
Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1998..........................197
4.2.1.3. Life imprisonment in the minimum sentences legislation era
(imposed by the High Courts) 1998 – 2007.......................203
4.2.1.4. The constitutional challenge to the minimum sentences legislation
...................................................................206
4.2.1.5. Life imprisonment after December 2007 and beyond..................208
4.2.2 Mauritius...........................................................................................213
4.2.2.1. The abolition of the death penalty and its impact on life
imprisonment................................................217
4.2.2.2. The root of the confusion and the solution...................................222
4.2.2.3. Substituting penal servitude for life for death sentences..............224
x