For the retrial, the court ordered that Kasete be provided with a suitably trained and impartial interpreter competent in Tigrinya and English, as well as in communicating with children.
Police Arrest 89 Suspects in Kampala, Wakiso and Mukono Operations
The High Court in Kampala has quashed the conviction of an Eritrean child who was sentenced to be removed from Uganda, ruling that the trial court failed to establish whether her guilty plea was informed and unequivocal and whether she had received appropriate legal assistance.
Justice Gadenya Paul Wolimbwa, of the Criminal Division, set aside the conviction, caution and removal order issued by the Nakawa Chief Magistrate’s Court on December 10, 2025.
The judge ordered a prompt retrial before a different magistrate sitting as a Family and Children Court, directing that the proceedings begin with a fresh plea and that the child be provided with a qualified interpreter and legal assistance at no cost.
The ruling arose from an appeal filed by Selam Kasete, a child of Eritrean nationality, through her lawful next friend, Asmelash Eden Kasete.
Kasete had been convicted of unlawfully entering and being present in Uganda, contrary to section 66(1)(h) of the Uganda Citizenship and Immigration Control Act, after pleading guilty.
According to the prosecution’s account presented during the original trial, she was intercepted on November 23, 2025, during a joint operation by Uganda Revenue Authority enforcement officers and police at Magamaga in Mayuge district.
She was reportedly travelling in a vehicle with other people suspected of being smuggled into Uganda. The prosecution said she identified herself as Eritrean but lacked documents to prove her identity and could not explain how she had entered the country.
She was subsequently taken to immigration authorities, who reportedly established that she had entered Uganda through a porous border point from Kenya without immigration permission.
On December 10, 2025, the Nakawa court convicted her following her guilty plea, cautioned her and ordered her removal to Eritrea through organised departure.
However, Justice Wolimbwa found that the trial record did not show that the court had inquired into her age or explored the circumstances surrounding her entry into Uganda before accepting the plea.
The judge noted that the prosecution had described Kasete as a juvenile and said she had been intercepted alongside people suspected of being smuggled into the country.
These circumstances, the judge held, required the trial court to establish her age and consider the safeguards applicable to children. The court also needed to clarify how she crossed the border, whether she acted voluntarily and whether she was seeking international protection.
Although the trial court had secured a Tigrinya interpreter and read the charge to her in that language, Justice Wolimbwa said those steps alone did not establish that she understood every element of the offence and the consequences of admitting it.
The judge emphasised that the responsibility to explain the charge and establish the accused person’s understanding rests with the magistrate, while an interpreter’s role is to facilitate communication.
The court also found that the record did not show that Kasete had been informed of her consular rights under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
The judge explained that authorities must inform detained foreign nationals of their consular rights without delay, while notification of the relevant consular post depends on the individual requesting it.
Justice Wolimbwa stressed that the absence of appropriate assistance for an unrepresented child, the unexplored circumstances of her entry and the failure to inform her of her consular rights undermined the fairness of the proceedings.
Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction.
The judge also set aside the order requiring the Eritrean Embassy to cooperate in her removal, directing that no steps be taken to remove her from Uganda unless a fresh order is lawfully made under the applicable immigration, child-protection and refugee laws.
He further directed that any proposed return of the child must be assessed carefully, taking into account reliable information about her age, identity, family, reception arrangements and protection needs. Such an assessment would ordinarily involve a report from a probation and social welfare officer.
Ex-Rwandan Soldier and Musician ‘Sergent Robert’ Found Beheaded in Uganda
For the retrial, the court ordered that Kasete be provided with a suitably trained and impartial interpreter competent in Tigrinya and English, as well as in communicating with children.
The magistrate must verify the interpreter’s competence, explain the charge in simple language, establish that any plea is voluntary and informed, and record the child’s responses as nearly as possible in her own words.
The court also directed that she be informed of her consular rights through the interpreter and that any request for consular notification be promptly transmitted to the relevant authorities.
Justice Wolimbwa ordered that Kasete be presented before the court for plea-taking by October 21, 2026.
The judge clarified that the appeal did not determine whether the underlying immigration charge was proved. Instead, the retrial would allow the charge to be determined lawfully, with the required safeguards in place.
The judgment was delivered on October 16, 2026, in the absence of the parties.