Facts
The First Appellant, together with the Second to Ninth Appellants, were convicted in the High Court of Tanzania at Dar-es-Salaam on three counts of treason, contravening Section 39(2)(a) of the Penal Code. Each was then sentenced to life imprisonment. In an appeal both against the convictions and sentences, and based on seventy-three substantive grounds of appeal, the Court of Appeal of Tanzania (per Nyalali, CJ) upheld the convictions and sentences in each case and dismissed the appeals in their entirety.
Held:
(i) The effect on the laying of charges brought about by the enactment of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985, is that the courts of this country are no longer bound to follow English practice and procedure in a criminal trial.
(ii) The word `may' in Section 283(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (now Section 298(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985) is unambiguous and crystal clear; and thus the trial judge's summing of the case to his assessors is not mandatory, but is prudent as a matter of practice.
(iii) It is sufficient for the trial Judge to state the substance or gist of the case on both sides to enable the assessors' opinions to be formed on the case in F general or on any particular point required.
(iv) Section 248 of the Criminal Procedure Code (now Section 265 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1985) obliges the trial judge, by necessary implication, to take the assessors' opinions before giving judgment.
(v) In deciding whether a magistrate's failure to comply fully with the Chief Justice's Instructions renders extra-judicial statements inadmissible, the question is whether apart from any such non-compliance, other circumstances suggest that the statements were made involuntarily.
(vi) A conviction on a retracted uncorroborated confession is competent if the court warns itself of the danger of acting upon such a confession and is fully satisfied that such confession cannot but be true.
(vii) A retracted uncorroborated confession, if truthful, can corroborate other evidence against the confessor.
(viii) Incriminating statements made at a trial within the trial are admissible at the main trial and can be used against their maker at the main trial.
(ix) A conviction on a charge of treason requires proof of an overt act as well as the perpetrator's appropriate intention and his allegiance to the Republic at the material time.
(x) An appellate court will not interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial court unless such sentence is manifestly excessive.
(xi) The appeals are dismissed in their entirety
No comments:
Post a Comment