The High Court has ordered the government to compensate journalists Timothy Murungi and Henry Sekanjako, Shs 75 million each, in recognition of the physical and psychological toll inflicted by the attack.
In his judgment, Justice Wamala ordered the government to pay Shs75 million to each journalist, acknowledging the physical and psychological harm caused by the assault.
“The applicants are entitled to compensation by way of damages for such wrongful conduct,” he stated
Mr Murungi, an assistant visual editor, and Mr Sekanjako, a senior journalist, were beaten by military officers while performing their duties.
The incident took place in February 2021 when the journalists, both working for New Vision, were covering opposition leader Robert Kyagulanyi’s petition to the UN Human Rights Office in Kampala and were assaulted by the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) soldiers.
In a case titled The Uganda Journalists Association vs. The Attorney General, the journalists pursued justice under the Human Rights Enforcement Act, 2019, and Article 50 of Uganda’s Constitution, which guarantees access to justice for human rights violations.
They alleged that their rights to freedom of the press, dignity, and protection from torture were violated.
Mr. Murungi’s testimony described the brutality of the attack, including being chased and struck on the head with a baton, resulting in recurring headaches and psychological distress.
Mr. Sekanjako recounted similar violence, stating he suffered injuries to his hand and back that impacted his ability to work.
The assault was argued to be part of a broader pattern of intimidation against journalists. Murungi asserted, “This was an attack on press freedom,” highlighting that such actions were intended to deter media coverage of politically sensitive events.
The Attorney General and senior military officials denied these allegations, defending the UPDF’s actions as justified.
While the journalists sought a public apology from the government or the military, the court rejected this request, deeming it unnecessary given the respondents’ denial of responsibility.
The Attorney General was held vicariously liable, underscoring state accountability for human rights violations by its agents.
