[2019] KEHC 1576 (KLR)
The High Court determined that it had already considered and dismissed the petitioner.s claims regarding violation of fair trial rights and the legality of the sentence in the previous appeal. The court held that it cannot sit on appeal or review its own judgment, as the proper forum for such redress is the Court of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 1576 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Alphose Omboga Obaga; Respondent: The Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyamira
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 31 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition dismissed
- Judges
- EM Muchoki
- Legal Topics
- Fair Trial Rights, Appeals Process, Jurisdiction of High Court
- 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
Alphose Omboga Obaga
Applicant
The Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner.s right to a fair trial under Article 50 of the Constitution was violated.
- 2 Whether the High Court can review or sit on appeal against its own previous judgment.
- 3 Whether the petitioner is entitled to a reduction of sentence or non-custodial sentence based on alleged violation of rights.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court determined that it had already considered and dismissed the petitioner.s claims regarding violation of fair trial rights and the legality of the sentence in the previous appeal. The court held that it cannot sit on appeal or review its own judgment, as the proper forum for such redress is the Court of Appeal. The petition was therefore misconceived and not properly before the court, leading to its dismissal.
Court Disposition
petition dismissed
Orders
- The petition is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYAMIRA
PETITION NO. 31 OF 2019
ALPHOSE OMBOGA OBAGA.....PETITIONER
-VRS-
THE REPUBLIC..........................RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
The petitioner in this case was the appellant in Nyamira HCCRA No. 10 of 2018 which was dismissed by this court on 14th March 2019. By this petition he seeks: -
“1. A declaration that his right to a fair trial as guaranteed by Article 50 was violated.
2. That this court reduce his sentence or give him a non custodial sentence.
3. That this court grant him reliefs as provided under Article 23 of the Constitution.
4. That having been in custody for 1 ½ years he be set at liberty.
5. Any other relief that this court may deem fit and just and fair to grant.”
This court heard the arguments by the parties on 16th October 2019 and the same have been considered very carefully. In a judgement rendered by this court on 14th March 2019, this court had the following to state about the appellant’s/now petitioner rights were violated: -
“I am not persuaded that his right to a fair trial was violated. He robustly participated in the trial meaning that he understood the charges facing him. Moreover, had the rights been violated, this would have been one of the grounds in this appeal. In the submissions his Advocate has not alluded to such violation…….”
It is clear therefore that this court considered the allegation of violation of his rights in the appeal just as it considered the legality and extent of the sentence. In my view therefore this petition is akin to asking me to sit on appeal against my own judgement which I cannot do. The petitioner’s remedy lay in filing an appeal or seeking a review in the Court of Appeal as provided in Article 50 (2) (q) of the Constitution which states:-
“50. Fair hearing
(2) Every accused person has the right to a fair trial, which includes the right—
(q) If convicted to appeal to, or apply for review by, a higher court as prescribed by law.”
This petition is misconceived and is not properly before this court as it cannot sit on appeal against its own judgement. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.
Signed, dated and delivered this 5th day of December 2019.
E. N. MAINA
JUDGE