This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site you consent to our use of cookies. Close

Africa Legal

Africa Legal

  • NEWS
  • JOBS
  • COURSES
  • CLIENTS
    • Sign in
    • Sign up
  • NEWS
  • COURSES
  • JOBS
    • Sign In
    • Sign Up
  • News
  • Courses
  • Jobs
  • Events
  • Business A-Z
  • Post a job
  • Contact Us
  • Clients
CLIENT SIGN IN
Country
  • Uganda
  • South Africa
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • Cameroon
  • United Kingdom
  • Cote d'Ivoire
  • Ghana
  • Tanzania
  • Zambia
  • Botswana
  • Morocco
  • Zimbabwe
  • Mauritius
  • Mozambique
  • Sudan
  • Rwanda
  • Ethiopia
  • Angola
  • Egypt
  • Togo
  • Mali
  • South Sudan
  • Swaziland
  • Senegal
  • Malawi
  • France
  • Guinea
  • Middle East
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo
  • Gambia
  • Sierra Leone
  • Germany
Category
  • Profiles
  • Analysis & Opinion
  • Career advice
  • In-house
  • Latest news
  • Press releases
  • Africa Legal Blog
  • Women in Law
  • Innovation
  • Human Rights
Practice area
  • Agriculture
  • Arbitration
  • Aviation
  • Banking and Finance
  • Capital markets
  • Charties and pro bono
  • Company commercial
  • Competition and antitrust
  • Construction and engineering
  • Consumer products
  • Corporate finance and M&A
  • Criminal
  • Education
  • Employment and benefits
  • Energy and natural resources
  • Environmental
  • Financial services
  • Fraud & white collar crime
  • Funds
  • Governance | risk and compliance
  • Government and public sector
  • Health and safety
  • Healthcare and pharmaceuticals
  • Insurance/Reinsurance
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation and dispute resolution
  • Logistics and transportation
  • Manufacturing and Industrial
  • Private client and family
  • Private equity
  • Projects and infrastructure
  • Real estate
  • Regulatory
  • Restructuring | insolvency and debt recovery
  • Shipping and maritime
  • Taxation
  • Technology media and telecoms
  • Travel and tourism
close

Registration

Registered Successfully!!!. We have sent you a confirmation email to your email address.
close


View My Saved News


close You must login to save your news
  • LOGIN
  • NEW USER

Login to your account

Forgotten your password?
or

Create an Account

close


View My Saved News


« Back

Free to Go

With poaching devastating wildlife across Africa it has become imperative for the legal community and police to step-up. Dropped balls mean accused walk free as happened in Tanzania recently. Tania Broughton reports.

Sep 09, 2019
Tania Broughton
Share

Erneo Kidilo and Matatizo Mkenza were caught red handed in September 2013 in the Ruaha National Park with a shotgun, three rounds of ammunition and “government trophies” -  kudu and impala.

The facts, as read out by the prosecutor at their subsequent trial in the district court, where that park rangers, while on a routine patrol, saw human footprints.

They followed them and arrested the pair.

They both pleaded guilty to three counts: unlawful entry into the park, possession of the “trophies” and possession of the firearm.

They raised no objection when the State Attorney tendered exhibits including their confessions, a wildlife valuation certificate and an inventory form.

They were convicted as charged and sentenced to a fine and an effective five-year prison sentence. 

Despite their pleas of guilty, they were aggrieved at the “excessive” sentences and lodged an appeal with the high court where the sentence was increased to 20 years - albeit now with an option of a fine.

They then lodged a “second appeal”.

In a recent judgment, Chief Justice Ibrahim Hamis Juma (with two judges concurring), said this time Kidilo and Mkenza raised several different objections.

“The senior state attorney opposed this saying they could not raise new matters on appeal,” he said.

The judges agreed with this.

However, the State Attorney raised a “point of law”, which the court had to deal with. And that was that the exhibits had not been read out to them at the initial trial “as the established practice of the court demands”.

While the prosecutor conceded that this could have the effect of expunging them from the record, he argued that the trial record reflected that they had admitted “all facts narrated and exhibits tendered before the court to be true and correct” and so they must have known the facts contained in them.

Judge Juma disagreed.

“Contents of these exhibit detailed facts which affect the ingredients of the charges. Full knowledge of them will enable an accused person to either accept the facts as true, or reject them and change his plea to not guilty.”

After setting aside the convictions and sentences, Judge Juma said the final issue to be determined was whether or not to order a retrial, as urged by the prosecutor.

“One major reason why we think a retrial will not serve the best interests of justice is the incompleteness of the record. We were told by court registry staff the exhibits in question are all

missing from the court file. 

“It will not be fair to subject them to a fresh trial. You are free to go,” he said.



Copyright : Re-publication of this article is authorised only in the following circumstances; the writer and Africa Legal are both recognised as the author and the website address www.africa-legal.com and original article link are back linked. A bio for the writer can be provided on request.

RELATED CATEGORY NEWS

African Legal Awards 2023 | Nomination Read more
Controversy follows removal of Malawi’ Read more
Landmark ruling on matrimonial rights Read more

RELATED COUNTRY NEWS

Influx of foreign law firms demands a Read more
Intra-African collaboration missing in Read more
A qualification you won’t regret Read more
Africa Legal
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Terms of use
  • Privacy and cookies policy
Members
  • Find a job
  • Take a course
  • Read news
  • Terms and conditions
  • Cancellations and refunds
Clients
  • Terms and conditions
  • Post a job
  • Host a course
  • Advertise
  • Share news
Connect with us
© Copyright 2023 | Africa Legal. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy