Jumanne, 19 Julai 2022

APPEALS COURT SEALS UP RAPISTS FREEDOM HOPES

 By FAUSTINE KAPAMA-Judiciary

THE Court of Appeal has confirmed the life imprisonment sentence imposed on two watchmen, Erick Maswi and Charles Masike, for gang raping a 15-year-old girl.

In a judgment delivered at Musoma recently, Justices Gerald Ndika, Winfrida Korosso and Othman Makungu ruled against Maswi and Masikel, the appellants, after holding that “the appeal is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed in its entirety.”

During hearing of the appeal, the appellants faulted the High Court for, among others, upholding their convictions disregarding the fact that the charge was defective and for not nullifying the proceedings of the trial court for failure to comply with section 210 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

They complained that the first appellate court (High Court) erred for relying on the evidence of victim without providing reasons, faulted the two courts below in not drawing adverse inference to prosecution for failure to summon crucial and material witnesses and for overlooking their defence.

When determining the appeal, the justices of the appeals court rejected one ground of appeal after another after evaluating the evidence tendered during the trial. On defectiveness of the charge, they noted a failure by the prosecution to cite relevant provision which established the offence charged.

They were, however, quick to point out that such error was dealt with by the High Court which, upon considering its legal implication and obtaining circumstances, found that it was curable under section 388 of the CPA and, thus, such an infraction was not fatal and could not prejudice the appellants’ rights.

According to the justices, the particulars of the offence informed the appellants of the nature of the offence, the evidence adduced in court especially that of the victim alleged that all the appellants raped her, which amounted to gang rape and they set up their defence against the charge they faced.

On the trial court's failure to comply with section 210(3) of the CPA, they agreed with the prosecution that “failure by the appellants to establish how they were prejudiced for noncompliance of section 210(3) of CPA, renders the infraction curable under section 388(1) of the CPA.”

Regarding the trial court's reliance on victim’s evidence without providing reasons for believing her, the justices of the Court of Appeal, currently the highest temple of justice in Tanzania, noted that both the trial and first appellate court did provide reasons for finding credence in the victim's evidence.

“We thus find the complaint to be misconceived since the trial and first appellate court gave reasons for finding (the victim) credible having analyzed her evidence. We find nothing to lead us to find that (the victim) was not credible in her evidence on the identification of the appellants,” they said.

On the complaint regarding failure by the prosecution to call material witnesses without plausible explanation, the justices cited section 143 of the Evidence Act, which declares that there is no number of witnesses required to prove any fact.

In the circumstances, they said, it was for the prosecution to determine the witnesses they wanted requisite to prove their case against the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt.

“Accordingly, we cannot fault the trial or first appellate court for not drawing adverse inference on the prosecution side for not calling witnesses who did not testify, since the evidence they adduced was sufficient to prove the case against the appellants to the standard required,” the justices said.

With respect to the ground of appeal that the defence of the appellants was not considered, they revisited the record of appeal and agree with the prosecution that the trial court summarized and analyzed the defence and so did the first appellate court and found to be wanting, hence being rejected.

On the ground alleging that the first appellate court failed to reassess circumstances under which the identifying witnesses recognized the appellants, the justices could not fault the reasoning and findings of the first appellate court on the matter.

“(The victim) properly identified the appellants as the culprits together with the circumstantial evidence related to the conditions she was in after being abandoned and found at a football pitch in a semi-conscious state,” they said.

It was alleged during the trial that on December 26, 2018 at Mara Secondary School area within the District and Municipality of Musoma in Mara Region the appellants together with another person, who was acquitted by the trial court, had carnal knowledge of a girl aged 15 years.

Justice Dr. Gerald Ndika.
Justice Winfrida Korosso.
Justice Othman Makungu.
Court hammer.

Court of Appeal building.

Hakuna maoni:

Chapisha Maoni