[2021] KEHC 2285 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 2285 (KLR)

The High Court dismissed the petition on the basis that the Supreme Court in Muruatetu only declared the mandatory aspect of the death sentence unconstitutional, not the death sentence itself. The applicant's request for the High Court to declare the death sentence unconstitutional and order a retrial was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 2285 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: David Amuku; Respondent: Republic
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Busia
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Petition E015nof 20 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Notice of Motion
Outcome
petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Mandatory Death Sentence, Constitutionality of Penal Code, Appeals Process, Jurisdiction of High Court
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Mandatory Death Sentence Constitutionality of Penal Code Appeals Process Jurisdiction of High Court

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Amuku

Petitioner

Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Notice of Motion

  1. 1 Whether the mandatory nature of the death sentence under section 204 of the Penal Code is unconstitutional following the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court can declare the death sentence unconstitutional and order a retrial after the Supreme Court's decision.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant followed the correct procedure in challenging his conviction and sentence.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the petition on the basis that the Supreme Court in Muruatetu only declared the mandatory aspect of the death sentence unconstitutional, not the death sentence itself. The applicant's request for the High Court to declare the death sentence unconstitutional and order a retrial was misconceived, as it would amount to the High Court sitting on appeal over the Supreme Court's decision, which is not permissible. The correct procedure for the applicant was to seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against his conviction and sentence, not to file a constitutional petition in the High Court. The application was therefore found to be devoid of merit and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

petition dismissed

Orders

  • The petition is dismissed.
  • The applicant is advised to seek necessary leave and appeal his conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal.