Joseph Kamali vs The United Republic (HC Criminal Appeal No. 169 of 1990) [1990] TZHC 300 (24 October 1990)

........ APFCLLLTE J .. JRISDICTION .IIIQII COUJ.T CIUIH?:,1 rfE.".L i:-!0.169 OF _1990·. ··.• ' . ,. " (Fror.1 the dG~isfon o:C- -;;J:-:.o Dis{ric,t, Court of ICa1:agtic .. Di.strict a/.; 'itai-&;.!i,-ro in Crininal Caso ifo.262A of:• 't98-9 •."'.'":Bbfore C.or-1oB.Z,Naclolebc 9 Esqop . ,· Disrict l:Iagisi;rat0) JOSEPIT 1(/J1JI o o o ,, • c o e • c- c: fl u i, o. o ,o o o o o o • ~ o • o o o • • o o .., .o • o o " o ,o • • • • e, o • o ..6.PPJill.,L.l.J·!T . .. ·, . . • •• r ..... - . \•. VEI'uSUS ;· .. \ . TIIE UUITE:9 REPTL3LIC o -- .' < ., •••• " •• o o.,.,. o ••• o •••••••••••••••• 1111RESPOEDEH 1 i.1 CIL:.:a.GE: Being in: possc.ssion Jire :": . .rms and i:..r:Jr.lunition wi t:.1out. Licei-:.ce or Permit c/s 13 ( 1) and 31 of iItlS and i·.mr;11.'!.i.u.·aon Ordiaanc·o Caps.123 Str.31 as v.0enclod and placed. by Soc·:..2 of 3rd Sc;:-oc:..1.1.lc of '.i.ct. No .. 13/D4. L_lJ D G N E N T. The appella.·rt was c;10..rgoc':. -;Hh to offence 0:' being in possession th2.t on 2/12/89 ho was fo1.md L1 mmuthorisod possossion of a sub mac.·;.L:,o gun a11d 17 rounds of a;nr:11.u1i·liion., In his dofonco ho C::.eniod: tha·l; ::.s w2,s ·l;'.10 CCM office and t; "oro >.c 1ras s>:.o--m the e,ru.n, t .. o officials accusccl ).:i.in of being in possession of ito Tho trial magistru,to :rejected l1is c:c?o:,.c,::;, convicted and sen•:;cncct '..1.i!:1 ·;;o fifteen ( 15) years imp1•isonmm'lt 1..mclor the 1-.linimur;1 Scn·;;caces .".ct (t.sS &":lonclod by :,cc 10/89. :Io bro;.1ght t'.1is appeal and has been ropres,.,ntocl by l'ir. Byabusha, {.cl-..roco.:i:•e. Bo·i;li com1s0ls D.:ii ·i;: .. 0 :18.l' were of consosus vi-JW ·i;.:.at ttie o::::::\J:1oe falls uHhin tw Economic 211cl Orga..."lisecl Cri::10 .:.ct ;:c, 13/84 as 2IJC:i.ll1.C<l -,, :'i.Ct lifo .. 10/D9, as such -(;he Si..1iJOrdinate court 1:i.ac:_ no jv.risdiction -;o ·:;:.:· ·i-'.; tu1lGss the Do? .P. has s3.11ction0d t!1e trial by b.is ccr"iii:'ic.;.:,te.. I co;.c'-1.r with t1c counsels.. The ·trial was a nulli·i-;y. I c.llow t:10 appenl q_112..s:1 t'.J.e w!1ole prococdin2,'s aml judgr;icnt of t.::o tri-d"l col:.rt wd doclc..re ·;;;::cD null and void. The final issne to co:1sic1or is whet.'. .or or n,/i; -o ordGr a ro-'Gri<'..l. Tho counsel for appoll8.i.1t ::..,'.S o.rguod the Wlirial sllol'J.d not 'be · ord.ercd beca1...1.sc t!10 evic.1.cmce on I'ocord is insu.fficicnt -'i;o oupport -;;)·,o charge even if a retrial b.e,s bean ·ordorcd11 Oi1 t]:i.o o·:;10r hand t:u cou.:.1Sol for t·o Republic argu.oc<.. ->.o opposite., On my pad; I uill stick to -~' o rule governing retrials. One of the conditions is ·:;;:"3.t t;10 acc1.:sec1 s·.,_o,-.ic.. .... -- I .........

• 2 not have served svbstmrtial part of· his scnt,mce., In -cl~.is caso· t:::.c ninimum sentence is 15 ·roa.rii'; ho ;.,.;s served only 7 mo:..Yhs, this is ·;;oo li tUe. · I ord..-::r tha; -~~:c appol°lant he -rctriocl cle novo before a · different riagistrate · of compctCJ.'i.t ;jurisdictio1. '• ,)._t,,;,1,:..•. •l. .Ji',"'I,.· •. ., • ... , . 1· ✓--·· - ( ( . IG}\ .. , · 1 • •. • l .... · T-, HW.iflZA \ ·A/1oi.zo \ -' ~ /..'•,. -- ,. V 'I .,... ---. .. -,,,.. , . 'r".:r : ..,,.,. : :: i;! t.. . ffl-;:i. F. ' • d::fu\ JUDGE. . .. .:· .. (, .,. '- ... , C ·r. - ·' ,4~ -·