[2021] KEHC 2757 (KLR)
The High Court held that it could not revisit its own decision after having already dismissed the applicant's appeal against conviction and sentence. Furthermore, the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, which declared the mandatory death sentence under Section 204 of the Penal Code unconstitutional, was expressly...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 2757 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kyalo Mwinzi; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Garissa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application 35 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- A Ali-Aroni
- Legal Topics
- Mandatory Sentencing, Sexual Offences, Constitutionality 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
Kyalo Mwinzi
Applicant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Miscellaneous Application / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory life sentence under Section 20(1) of the Sexual Offences Act is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court decision in Muruatetu.
- 2 Whether the High Court can revisit its own decision after dismissing an appeal on conviction and sentence.
- 3 Whether the Muruatetu decision applies to offences under the Sexual Offences Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court held that it could not revisit its own decision after having already dismissed the applicant's appeal against conviction and sentence. Furthermore, the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, which declared the mandatory death sentence under Section 204 of the Penal Code unconstitutional, was expressly limited to that section and did not extend to mandatory sentences under the Sexual Offences Act. The Supreme Court's subsequent directions clarified that Muruatetu does not provide relief for those convicted under the Sexual Offences Act. Therefore, the application for reconsideration of the mandatory life sentence was without merit and had to be dismissed.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT GARISSA
CRIMINAL MISC. APPL. NO. 35 OF 2020
KYALO MWINZI......................................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC.............................................................................................RESPONDENT
RULING
1. In the application before court the Applicant seeks to have this court consider the constitutionality of the mandatory nature of the sentence imposed on him in Criminal Case No. 670 of 2014. He cited several cases which took into account the case of Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Others vs Republic Petition No. 15 & 16 (Consolidated) of 2015 a Supreme Court decision.
2. Initially the State objected to the application in their written submissions urging that the decision of Muruatetu cannot apply retroactively. Secondly the Applicant had appealed to this court and a Judgement delivered.
3. At the hearing of the application the State conceded to application.
4. The application was argued before the Supreme Court issued further directions on the 6th of July 2021 which clarified and explained its Judgement in the Muruatetu case.
5. The Applicant herein was originally charged with the offence of incest contrary to Section 20(1) of the Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.
6. Being aggrieved by the Judgement he appealed to this court in Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2015. The court found no merit in the appeal, upheld both conviction and sentence.
7. For starters this court having upheld the conviction and sentence on appeal, it cannot sit on appeal against its own Judgement.
8. The only recourse left after the first appeal was to prefer a second appeal to the Court of Appeal
9. Thirdly the directive of the Supreme Court in the Muruatetu case clarified that the case did not give reprieve for those charged under the Sexual Offences Act, or any other statute or section of the law. The Supreme Court made it clear that it only dealt with Section 204 of the Penal Code in the said case. So that the said decision does not in anyway support the current application.
10. For the above reasons this application must fail.
It is dismissed.
DATED, DELIVERED AND SIGNED AT GARISSA THIS 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021.
......................
ALI-ARONI
JUDGE