[2015] KEHC 3751 (KLR)
The court found that the plea of guilty entered by the appellants was not unequivocal, particularly for the 2nd Appellant who did not understand either Kiswahili or English and was not provided with an interpreter. This violated his right to a fair trial and rendered the plea invalid. Additionally, the prosecution...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 3751 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Ali Issac; Appellant: Hagos Gabremaryan; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 87 & 94 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal_allowed
- Judges
- DW Mbuteti
- Legal Topics
- Human Trafficking, Plea Taking, Interpretation Rights, Minor Offender, Conviction Quashing
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ali Issac
Appellant
Hagos Gabremaryan
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plea of guilty was unequivocal given the language barrier for the 2nd Appellant.
- 2 Whether the prosecution provided sufficient facts after the plea of guilty.
- 3 Whether the conviction and sentence were valid in light of the 1st Appellant's minority status.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the plea of guilty entered by the appellants was not unequivocal, particularly for the 2nd Appellant who did not understand either Kiswahili or English and was not provided with an interpreter. This violated his right to a fair trial and rendered the plea invalid. Additionally, the prosecution failed to provide sufficient facts after the plea, merely referring to the charge sheet, which was inadequate for the nature of the offence. Furthermore, the 1st Appellant was a minor at the time of conviction and sentencing, and the trial court did not properly consider his age or apply the appropriate legal protections for children in conflict with the law. For these reasons,...
Court Disposition
appeal_allowed
Orders
- The convictions of both appellants are quashed.
- The sentences passed against both appellants are set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
CRIMINAL APPEALS NOS 87 AND 94 OF 2014
(CONSOLIDATED)
(APPEALS FROM CONVICTION AND SENTENCE IN KIGUMO SPM CRIMINAL CASE NO 1287 OF 2014 – D ORIMBA, SPM)
1. ALI ISSAC
2. HAGOS GABREMARYAN…....APPELLANTS
VERSUS
REPUBLIC……………………………RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
1. The Appellants were on 23/05/2014 convicted upon their own plea of human traffickingcontrary to section 53(1) as read with subsection (2) of the Kenya Citizenship and Immigration Act, Cap 172. They were each fined KShs 300,000/00 or in default to serve two (2) years imprisonment. They did not pay the fines and they commenced serving their default sentences. On 02/10/2014 the 1st Appellant, Ali Isaac, was released on bail pending disposal of his appeal. The 2nd Appellant, Hugos Gabremaryan, is serving his default sentence. They have appealed against both conviction and sentence.
2. The two appeals were on 21/04/2015 consolidated for hearing together. It was then apparent that the 2nd Appellant (who is an Ethiopian) understood neither Kiswahili nor English, and the court directed that an Ethiopian (specifically an Amharic) interpreter be provided for him at the hearing of the appeals on 22/06/2015. A request for the same was addressed in writing to the High Court, Nairobi. But come 22/06/2015, and no Amharic, or even Ethiopian, interpreter was provided. The court therefore decided to proceed with the appeals by way of revision rather than delay them any longer.
3. I have read the very brief record of the trial court. It is quite clear that the pleas of the Appellants were not unequivocal. The record states that interpretation was English to Kiswahili. As already observed, the 2nd Appellant understands neither Kiswahili nor English. So, he could not have understood and followed the proceedings. He could not have understood the charge he faced and plead to it in knowledge.
4. Secondly, after the Appellants supposedly admitted the charges, no facts were given by the prosecution. The prosecutor simply said, “Facts as per charge sheet.” Given the nature of the offence charged, it was not sufficient merely to state, “Facts as per charge sheet.” The Prosecutor ought to have given full facts.
5. It is also to be noted that in respect to the 1st Appellant, an age-assessment report was filed following an order of this court. At the time of the plea and sentencing the 1st Appellant was, and still is, a minor, now aged about 16 years.
6. For all the above reasons the Appellants’ convictions are hereby quashed and the sentences passed against them set aside. The 2nd Appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith unless otherwise lawfully held. As already observed the 1st Appellant was released on bail. He and his surety are hereby released from their bonds. It is so ordered.
DATED AND SIGNED AT MURANG’A THIS 2ND DAY OF JULY 2015
H.P.G. WAWERU
JUDGE
DELIVERED THIS 3rd DAY OF JULY 2015