[2023] KEHC 23115 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioner was eligible for resentencing in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic, which declared the mandatory death sentence unconstitutional. The court considered the petitioner's mitigation, including his age, remorse, and good conduct,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 23115 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Abdul Longolan Enoi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 13 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- life sentence set aside; petitioner resentenced to 25 years imprisonment with credit for time served; right of appeal within 14 days.
- Judges
- REA Ougo
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Death Sentence, Resentencing, Right to Fair Trial, Mitigation of Sentence
- 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
Abdul Longolan Enoi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory death sentence imposed on the petitioner is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic.
- 2 Whether the petitioner is eligible for resentencing despite not having appealed the original sentence.
- 3 Whether the circumstances of the offence and the petitioner's mitigation warrant a revision of sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioner was eligible for resentencing in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic, which declared the mandatory death sentence unconstitutional. The court considered the petitioner's mitigation, including his age, remorse, and good conduct, but also took into account the aggravating circumstances of the offence, specifically the torture inflicted on the deceased. Balancing these factors, the court set aside the life sentence and resentenced the petitioner to twenty-five years imprisonment, with credit for time already served and the period spent in remand. The petitioner was informed of his right to appeal within...
Court Disposition
life sentence set aside; petitioner resentenced to 25 years imprisonment with credit for time served; right of appeal within 14 days.
Orders
- The life sentence imposed on Abdul Longolan Enoi is set aside.
- The petitioner is resentenced to twenty-five (25) years imprisonment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
Enoi v Republic (Petition 13 of 2019) [2023] KEHC 23115 (KLR) (21 September 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 23115 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Bungoma
Petition 13 of 2019
REA Ougo, J
September 21, 2023
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLES 22(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION AND IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLES 23,25 (A) , ( C ), 27 (1) (2) , 28, 20(1),50 (2) (Q), 19 (1) (2) 165 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 203 AS READ WITH SECTION 294 OF THE PENAL CODE
Between
abdul Longolan Enoi
Petitioner
and
Republic
Respondent
Judgment
1. In Petition filed on the February 25, 2019 Abdul Longolan Enoi the petitioner depones that; he was charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code in HCCRC No 37 of 2006. His death sentence was commuted to life sentence by the President in the year 2009. He has been in custody for the last 12 years since his arrest and that based on the Supreme Court ruling made on the December 14, 2017 the death sentence awarded on him is unconstitutional.
2. In a notice of motion filed simultaneously with the petition the petitioner seeks orders of revision of sentence in respect of the murder case in HCCRC No 37 of 2006.
3. The petitioner filed written submissions on the January 15, 2023. I have read and considered the said submissions. He seeks a review of his sentence and relies on the case ofFrancis Karioko Muruatetu & Another vs R (2016) eKLR where it was held that the mandatory death sentence deprives the courts legitimate jurisdiction to exercise discretion to individualize an appropriate sentence to the relevant aspects of the character and record of each accused persons hence unconstitutional. That his rights under Article 25(2) (1), 28 and 50 (2) (q) of the Constitutionwere contravened and that he should be allowed to mitigate under section329 of the C.P.C Cap.75. He submits further that he was 32 years old at the time of his arrest and that he was a first offender he is remorseful and repentant. That during his imprisonment term he has maintained high discipline towards his inmate and staff. That he is the sole breadwinner to his family who are now helpless due to his absence. That the court should consider the pre-trial period in custody under section 332 (2) of the Penal Code.
4. The application was opposed. Mr. Ayekha for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has not filed an appeal to the higher court as a matter of procedure. That he should have appealed. That on that basis the court cannot review the sentence from a concurrent court. That the sentence was proper in law.
5. Although the respondent submits that the petitioner should have appealed. The Supreme Court in the case ofFrancis Muruatetu(Supra) (Directions ) stated as follows at paragraph 16 ( b), ‘ All offenders subject to the mandatory death penalty , including those convicted and sentenced prior to 2010, who are serving commuted sentences, will be eligible for re-sentencing including all offenders sentenced to death as at the time of the decision was made on December 14,2017. ’
6. The petitioner was sentenced to death after a full trial on the September 22, 2010. He seeks re-sentencing. He is eligible to re-sentencing. In his petition he has stated his mitigation.
7. I have considered the following; the age of the offender, he is remorseful, what is stated in the petition on his character. I have also considered the manner in which the offence was committed. The petitioner tortured the deceased before her death her toe nails were plucked off and she had several bodily injuries on several parts of her body. She died a painful death. I set aside the life sentence and re-sentence the petitioner Abdul Longolan Enoi to twenty-five (25) years imprisonment. In computing the sentence, the period, he was in remand and what is already served shall be taken into. He has a right of appeal within 14 days.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT BUNGOMA THIS 21ST DAY SEPTEMBER 2023. R.E.OUGOJUDGEIn the presence;Abdul Longolan Enoi/Petitioner - PresentMr. Ayekha For the Respondent/StateWilkister /Okwaro C/A