[2019] KEHC 12056 (KLR)
The court found that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence is unconstitutional, and the court is empowered to resentence the petitioner. The petitioner had already served 27 years in custody for the offence of robbery with violence. The court considered the period served,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 12056 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: James Mwazuzu Mwazome; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecution
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 55 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Resentencing Judgment
- Outcome
- death_sentence_set_aside_and_petitioner_released
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Death Sentence, Resentencing, Right to Fair Trial, Fundamental Rights, Penal Code Section 296 2
- 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
James Mwazuzu Mwazome
Petitioner
Director of Public Prosecution
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Resentencing Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory death sentence under Section 296(2) of the Penal Code is unconstitutional following the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
- 2 Whether the petitioner, having served 27 years in custody, should be resentenced and released.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, following the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, the mandatory death sentence is unconstitutional, and the court is empowered to resentence the petitioner. The petitioner had already served 27 years in custody for the offence of robbery with violence. The court considered the period served, the principles of sentencing including mitigation, rehabilitation, and the gravity of the offence, and determined that 27 years is not a short period. The pain suffered by the complainant cannot be atoned for by further imprisonment. Therefore, the court set aside the death sentence and substituted it with a term of 27 years, which the petitioner had already served, resulting...
Court Disposition
death_sentence_set_aside_and_petitioner_released
Orders
- The death sentence imposed upon the petitioner is set aside.
- The petitioner is sentenced to a term of 27 years, which he has already served.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MOMBASA
CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
PETITION NO. 55 OF 2019
IN THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA 2010 (SUPERVISORY JURISDICTION AND PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF AN INDIVIDUAL) HIGH COURT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE RULES 2013
IN THE MATTER OF: SECTION 18(1) (2) POLICE ACT CAP 84 LAWS OF KENYA
AND
IN THE MATTER OF: ARTICLE 22(i) OF THE CONSTITUTION
AND
IN THE MATTER OF: ARTICLES 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 48, 50,258 & 259 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KENYA
AND
BETWEEN
JAMES MWAZUZU MWAZOME..................................................PETITIONER
AND
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION...............................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. The Petitioner JAMES MWAZUZU MWAZOME was charged with the offence of robbery with violence contrary to Section 296 (2) in Criminal Case No. 207 of 2004 of the Penal Code and sentenced to death. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed on 18th January, 2001.
2. The petition is now before the Court for resentencing pursuant to the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR which decided that a mandatory death sentence is unconstitutional.
3. The Petitioner has been in custody for 27 years. He submitted that the said period of 27 years is enough punishment for the crime he was convicted for, and that he should be released to go home.
4. Mr. Fedha for the prosecution submitted that the offence committed was heinous and should be punished with a sentence of 27 years including the 27 years he has been in custody.
5. I have considered the submissions. The principle in sentencing is that the Court should take into account the mitigation offered by the Petitioner, the facts of retribution, rehabilitation and reformation. The Court should ask itself whether the Petitioner is remorseful, and has sufficiently been rehabilitated and reformed to reasonably be expected to assume life in a free and orderly society. The Court must also look at the nature of the offence the Petitioner was convicted for, and how it has effected the victims.
6. The particulars in the cause of robbery injured the complainant using a sharp instrument. The Court does not know now the condition of the victim.
The Determination
7. On the issue of sentence, this court agrees with the Petitioner that the Supreme Court in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another vs. Republic [2017] eKLR declared the mandatory nature of the death sentence as provided for under Section 204 of the Penal Code to be unconstitutional. Therefore, this Court has the mandate to resentence the Petitioner. The Petitioner has already served 27 years in custody. The pain done to the complainant cannot be atoned for by any imprisonment. However, 27 years in prison is not a short time. In the circumstances, I do hereby set aside the death sentence imposed upon the Petitioner and in substitution the Petitioner is hereby jailed to a term of 27 years which he has already served in prison, with the result that the Petitioner is forthwith released unless otherwise lawfully held.
That is the Judgment of the Court.
Dated, Signed and Delivered in Mombasa this 26th day of November, 2019.
E. K. OGOLA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Fedha for DPP
Petitioner in person
Mr. Kaunda Court Assistant