By FAUSTINE KAPAMA-Judiciary
RESIDENT of Serengeti
in Mara Region Ngusa Yohana, alias Kiteri is to remain behind bars for 20 years
for unlawful possession of 50 pieces of fresh meat of buffalo, which are
government trophies, valued at over 18m/-.
This followed the decision of
the High Court, Musoma District Registry, to dismiss in part the appeal in
which Yohana, the appellant, had lodged in attempt to fault findings of trial
District Court of Serengeti at Mugumu.
Judge Awamu Mbagwa ruled that
the offence under which the appellant was charged with was proved by the
prosecution as required in criminal cases, that is, beyond reasonable doubt.
“On all this account, I am
opined that the offence was sufficiently proved. I therefore uphold conviction
of unlawful possession of government trophies and the resultant sentence of
twenty (20) imprisonment,” the judge ruled.
He recalled the testimony of
two arresting officers who clearly testified on how they arrested the appellant
with the alleged trophies. In addition, the judge said, one of such officers
tendered the certificate of seizure, which was also signed by the appellant.
Besides, he said, another
prosecution witness had told the court that he identified the alleged trophies
to be fifty pieces of fresh buffalo meat and valued them at 8, 740,000/- before
being taken to a magistrate together with the appellant for disposal order as
they were about to decay.
“I have looked at the
inventory order and got satisfied that the procedures for disposal were fully
complied with. (It) is clear that the magistrate gave audience to the appellant
and thereafter proceeded to issue an order for disposal,” the judge said.
According to him, the
appellant, in his testimony, did not deny to have signed the seizure
certificate nor did he dispute being before the magistrate during issuance of
the disposal order.
The trial district court had
convicted the appellant with two others counts of unlawful entry into National
Park and unlawful possession of weapons. When disposing of the appeal in
question, the judge acquitted the appellant in respect of such two offences for
a number of reasons.
He concurred with the
prosecution that the provision of section 21 (1) (a) of the National Park Act
under which the appellant was charged with does not establish the offence of
unlawfully entry in the National Park.
“As such, the trial
magistrate erred to convict the appellant of nonexistent offence. The
conviction and attendant sentence therefore deserve to be quashed and set
aside,” the judge said.
As to the count of unlawfully
possession of weapon in the National Park, he parted company with the
prosecution for failure to adduce demonstrative evidence sufficiently proving
that the appellant was arrested within the boundaries of the National Park.
The judge noted that the
appellant was allegedly arrested at Milima ya Nyamuma area within Serengeti
National Park, but there was no further evidence to prove the allegation apart
from the verbal of the arresting officers.
“I am inclined to hold that
the prosecution did not establish to the required standard that the appellant
was found with weapons within the National Park. Accordingly, I quash
conviction and set aside the sentence with regard to the count of unlawful
possession of weapons within the National Park,” he said.
It is was alleged by the prosecution
that on October 9, 2020, the appellant was found at Milima ya Nyamuma area
within Serengeti National Park while in possession of government trophies to
wit, 50 pieces of fresh meat of buffalo and two weapons namely, one machete and
knife.
On the material date at about
01:30hrs, while on patrol, at Milima ya Nyamuma area within Serengeti National
Park, two arresting officers saw the appellant with a bicycle, knife and
machete and fifty pieces of fresh meat of buffalo.
Upon interrogation, the
appellant replied that he had no permit to enter in the National Park. As such,
the duo along with other park rangers seized the government trophies, weapons
and bicycle from the appellant.
Thereafter, they filled the
seized items in the seizure certificate, which was signed by both the arresting
officers and the appellant. Subsequently, the appellant along with the seized
items was submitted to Mugumu Police Station for further investigation
measures.
Hakuna maoni:
Chapisha Maoni