Communication 431/12 – Thomas Kwoyelo v. Uganda 76. The Complainant asserts that the Victim was detained without any indication on when he would appear in court as this depended on when the President of the Republic of Uganda would appoint new judges to the bench. 77. The Complainant submits that the above-mentioned actions are in breach of Article 7 of the Charter. Submission of the Respondent State on Merits 78. The Respondent State disputes several of the submissions of the Complainant presented as facts, and contends that some of the alleged facts are far from the true account of the events. 79. The Respondent State disputes and denies that the Victim was a former ‘child soldier’ in the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), or that he ever ‘surrendered’ on the battlefield, as alleged. The Respondent State claims that credible investigations by the Ugandan Police Force established that the Victim was never abducted by, nor was he a child soldier in the LRA, but that he enlisted in LRA as an adult and rose through the ranks to become a high ranking ‘Colonel’ and rebel Commander.14 80. The State avers that in March 2009, the Victim was shot during active armed combat against the UPDF in Garamba Forest, DRC. He did not ‘surrender’ as alleged, but on the contrary he was captured by the UPDF after being shot and wounded on the battlefield. In fact, Victim only ‘renounced’ rebellion in January 2010 in his application for amnesty which was made while on remand in Uganda Government Murchison Prison (Luzira), after being charged with criminal offences.15 Paragraph 1.1. of the ‘Summary of the Case’ in the Chief Magistrate’s Court - attached to Complainant’s Facts as A, and paragraph 2 of the Indictment attached as B1. 14 15 The Amnesty Declaration Form attached to Complainant’s Facts as C. 19 62nd Ordinary Session, 25 April – 9 July 2018