[2010] KEHC 1580 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant's constitutional right to a fair trial was violated because he did not receive interpretation services during the testimony of PW1 and PW2, which he could not understand due to language barriers. The record showed that interpretation into Samburu was provided for subsequent...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 1580 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Ephantus Letuluai; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Revision 337 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Revision / Ruling on Referral From Trial Court Regarding Fair Trial Issue
- Outcome
- Application allowed; trial court directed to recall PW1 and PW2 for interpretation into Samburu.
- Legal Topics
- Right to Fair Trial, Interpretation Services, Criminal Procedure, Constitutional Rights
- 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
Ephantus Letuluai
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Referral From Trial Court Regarding Fair Trial Issue
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant's right to a fair trial was violated by the absence of interpretation during the testimony of PW1 and PW2.
- 2 Whether the evidence of PW1 and PW2 should be recalled and interpreted for the applicant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant's constitutional right to a fair trial was violated because he did not receive interpretation services during the testimony of PW1 and PW2, which he could not understand due to language barriers. The record showed that interpretation into Samburu was provided for subsequent witnesses but not for the initial ones. This omission was fundamental and affected the fairness of the proceedings. The court therefore directed that PW1 and PW2 be recalled so their evidence could be interpreted into Samburu, ensuring the applicant's right to fully understand and participate in his trial.
Court Disposition
Application allowed; trial court directed to recall PW1 and PW2 for interpretation into Samburu.
Orders
- PW1 and PW2 to be recalled and their evidence interpreted into Samburu language for the applicant.
- Trial court to proceed to determine the matter after interpretation is provided.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAKURU
Criminal Revision 337 of 2010
EPHANTUS LETULUAI………………..………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC…………………………………….….DEFENDANT
RULING
A simple but fundamental issue has arisen in the course of the applicant’s trial in Nakuru CM Criminal Case No. 1319 of 2006 in which he is charged with robbery with violence contrary to Section 296(2) of the Penal Code.In the course of the trial PW1 and PW2 in that case testified without the applicant having the services of an interpreter.When the Principal Magistrate who is now seized of the matter after taking over the trial from the previous magistrate who has since gone on transfer realized the omission after the prosecution had closed its case and the accused had testified in his defence he referred the matter to me under Section 67 of the Constitution.
Section 77(2)(f)of the Constitution provides that:-
“Every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be permitted to have without payment the assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand the language used at the trial of the charge.”
The applicant in this case is a Samburu who does not understand either English or Kiswahili.The lower record shows that when PW3 and PW4 testified there was interpretation into Samburu language.There was no such interpretation when PW1 and PW2 testified.In the circumstances I find that the applicant’s constitutional right to a fair trial was violated.Consequently I direct that PW1 and PW2 be recalled and their evidence be interpreted into Samburu language which the applicant understands after which the trial court will decide the matter.
DATED and DELIVERED at Nakuru this 24th day of May, 2010.
D. K. MARAGA
JUDGE.