[2025] KEHC 5954 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 5954 (KLR)

The High Court determined that the omission by the trial court to order the repatriation of the respondent, a Tanzanian national convicted of being a member of a terrorist group, constituted an error that could be corrected under its revisionary jurisdiction. The court found that it was within its powers under Article 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution and Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code to revise the sentence to include an order for repatriation. The court held that such an order was necessary to ensure the proper administration of justice and to address the oversight by the trial court. Accordingly, the sentence was revised to direct that upon completion of the custodial...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 5954 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Republic; Respondent: Musa Shaban Kabughu
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Garissa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
13 May 2025
Case Number
Criminal Revision E069 of 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Ruling on Revision of Sentence
Outcome
sentence revised to include repatriation order
Judges
JN Onyiego
Legal Topics
Terrorism Offences, Sentencing Revision, Repatriation Orders
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Terrorism Offences Sentencing Revision Repatriation Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Republic

Applicant

Musa Shaban Kabughu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Ruling on Revision of Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court can revise a sentence to include an order for repatriation of a convicted foreign national upon completion of sentence.
  2. 2 Whether the omission by the trial court to order repatriation was an error that can be corrected under the court's revisionary powers.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court determined that the omission by the trial court to order the repatriation of the respondent, a Tanzanian national convicted of being a member of a terrorist group, constituted an error that could be corrected under its revisionary jurisdiction. The court found that it was within its powers under Article 165(6) and (7) of the Constitution and Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code to revise the sentence to include an order for repatriation. The court held that such an order was necessary to ensure the proper administration of justice and to address the oversight by the trial court. Accordingly, the sentence was revised to direct that upon completion of the custodial...

Court Disposition

sentence revised to include repatriation order

Orders

  • The sentence of 15 years imprisonment is revised to include an order that upon completion of the sentence, the respondent shall be repatriated to his home country (Tanzania) through the Immigration office in conjunction with the OCS Garissa police station.