|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1991 |
|
|
|
23 December 1991 |
|
Appellants' murder convictions quashed for misdirection on accomplice evidence and lack of corroboration.
Criminal law – accomplice evidence (s.142 Evidence Act) – requirement for corroboration and caution – witnesses with interest/immediate suspects – misdirection by trial judge – assessors’ opinions – unsafe convictions – quashing death sentences.
|
23 December 1991 |
|
Exclusion of a cautioned statement for lack of trial-within-trial did not defeat conviction based on credible eyewitnesses.
Criminal law – Admissibility of cautioned statements – requirement to conduct a trial within a trial on objection; Evidence – credibility of eyewitnesses despite minor inconsistencies; Aiding and abetting – liability for facilitating acts; Defence of compulsion – must operate throughout act to excuse liability.
|
23 December 1991 |
|
|
23 December 1991 |
|
Failure to call a crucial eyewitness and assessors’ view of provocation led the Court to substitute manslaughter convictions and quash murder convictions.
Criminal law – Non‑production of material eyewitness – permissible adverse inference – when to draw; Provocation – weight of assessors’ concurrent opinion; Substitution of conviction from murder to manslaughter; Sentence and credit for time in custody.
|
17 December 1991 |
|
Identification by two eyewitnesses and common intention sustain murder conviction despite interpreter recording omission.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – eyewitness identification of a neighbour – credibility and mistaken identity; Criminal procedure – use of interpreter – failure to record interpreter’s identity/oath and belated complaint; Criminal law – common intention – liability for murder when one participant fires fatal shot during joint unlawful purpose (arson).
|
17 December 1991 |
| June 1991 |
|
|
Reported
Constitutional Law - Jurisdiction of the High Court to enforce basic rights enshrined in the Constitution - Judge raises issue of constitutionality without there being a complaint - Whether judge has jurisdiction.
Bill of Rights - Procedure and practice of the High Court in enforcing constitutional bill of rights - Judge raises issue of constitutionality
without there being any complaint to court - Whether procedurally proper. |
14 June 1991 |
|
Reported
Evidence -Identification Parade - Identification ofaccusedperson by way of identification parade — Value of identification parade proceedings where the identifying witness is not called to testify in court - Sections 164(c) and166 of the Evidence Act 1967 |
14 June 1991 |
|
Reported
Whether identification‑parade irregularities made the identification unreliable and the conviction unsafe.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Identification parade – Admissibility and probative value of parade proceedings – Effect of long interval between event and identification – Hints by parade conductor and dissimilarity of lineup members – Whether irregularities render conviction unsafe.
|
14 June 1991 |
|
Court affirmed murder convictions despite repudiated/co-accused confessions, finding sufficient corroborative evidence and rejecting the alibi.
Criminal law – Murder – Extra-judicial confessions – Repudiated and co-accused confessions – Requirement for corroboration – Recovery of stolen property and conduct as corroborative evidence – Alibi credibility – Appellate review of sufficiency of evidence.
|
14 June 1991 |
|
Omission to direct assessors on provocation not fatal where no evidence of provocation; murder conviction upheld.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation – Direction to assessors – Non‑direction alleged – No evidence of provocation on record – Appeal dismissed.
|
14 June 1991 |
|
Appeal allowed: inconsistencies in prosecution evidence and admissibility issues left reasonable doubt; murder conviction quashed.
Criminal law – Murder – Self‑defence – Credibility of witnesses and inconsistencies in evidence – Benefit of doubt – Evidence Act (statement under Part IV / s.34B) and admissibility of documents (sketch plan).
|
14 June 1991 |
|
Appeal dismissed: eyewitness and circumstantial evidence upheld murder conviction; juvenile sentenced to detention during President's pleasure.
Criminal law – murder – sufficiency and credibility of eyewitness evidence; defences of provocation and self‑defence – failure to prove; circumstantial corroboration by possession of stolen goods; sentencing of juvenile offender – detention during President's pleasure (s.26(2) Penal Code).
|
14 June 1991 |
|
Identification by a surviving witness upheld convictions; belated alibi failed and provocation defence was unavailable, appeals dismissed.
* Criminal law – identification – credibility of single surviving witness – circumstances and consistency can render identification reliable. * Criminal law – alibi – belatedly raised alibi which is unproved does not necessarily create reasonable doubt. * Sentencing – omnibus death sentence for multiple murders – appellate court may set aside omnibus sentence and impose appropriate sentence for one count while leaving others on record. * Criminal law – provocation – defence unavailable where no evidence of abusive words or conduct to justify sudden loss of self-control.
|
14 June 1991 |
|
Intoxication did not negate malice aforethought; manslaughter conviction quashed and substituted with murder and death sentence.
Criminal law – Intoxication as defence – Whether intoxication negates malice aforethought; evaluation of eyewitness credibility; appellate substitution of conviction and mandatory sentence for murder.
|
11 June 1991 |
|
Court rejects provocation defence where alleged insults were belated, lacked suddenness, and the killing was premeditated.
Criminal law – Murder – Provocation as defence – Requirement of suddenness and heat of passion; credibility of extra-judicial statements and belated allegations; premeditation and vengeance.
|
11 June 1991 |
| May 1991 |
|
|
Omission to allow assessors to question witnesses does not automatically void a High Court trial; lack of prejudice is decisive.
Criminal procedure — Assessors — Role and function of assessors in High Court trials — Failure to afford assessors opportunity to question witnesses does not automatically render trial a nullity; inquiry turns on prejudice and whether assessors had realistic opportunity to participate.
|
28 May 1991 |
|
Reported
Constitutional Law - Basic rights enshrined in the Constitution -Procedure and jurisdiction of the High Court in enforcing basic rights and freedoms - Articles 30(3) and (4) and 108(1) and (2) of the Constitution.
Constitutional Law - Constitutional Bill of Rights and its interpretation - Use ofthe African Charter on Human and People's Rights in interpreting the Bill of Right
Bill of Rights and Freedoms - The Right to personal liberty - The right to bail and circumstances and procedure for denying bail to an accusedperson - Section 148(5)(e) ofthe Criminal Procedure Act 1985 and article 15(2) (a) of the Constitution.
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Bail - Denial of boil in criminal trials: Whether violative of the constitutional presumption of innocence - SectionJ48(5)(e) ofthe Criminal Procedure Act 1985 and article 13(6)(b) of the Constitution Constitutional Law - Bill of Rights and Criminal Practice and Procedure - The Right to gunlity before the law: Whether violated by denial of bail - Section 148(5)(e) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985 and article 13 (4) and (5) of the Constitution
Constitutional Law - Doctrine of Separation of Powers - Statutory provisions prohibiting the grant of bail - Whether they violate the doctrine of separation of powers
Bill of Rights - Derogation Clauses in the Bill of Rights - Circumstances in which statutory provisions violating basic rights and freedoms may be saved by derogation clauses - Section 148(5)(e) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985 and article 30 of the Constitution. |
16 May 1991 |