[2019] KEHC 1520 (KLR)
The court found that the mandatory death sentence imposed on the Petitioner was unconstitutional, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic. The court held that sentencing must consider the offender's mitigation and personal circumstances. The Petitioner had served 21...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 1520 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Stephen Asanga Kazungu; Respondent: The Director of Public Prosecutions
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Mombasa
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Petition 47 of 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition allowed; petitioner resentenced to period served and released
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Death Penalty, Sentencing Principles, Rights of Convicts, Mitigation, Cruel Inhuman Degrading Punishment
- 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
Stephen Asanga Kazungu
Petitioner
The Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mandatory death sentence imposed on the Petitioner was unconstitutional and violated his fundamental rights.
- 2 Whether the sentencing courts failed to consider the Petitioner's mitigation, thus infringing his constitutional rights.
- 3 Whether the Petitioner is entitled to resentencing in light of the Supreme Court decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the mandatory death sentence imposed on the Petitioner was unconstitutional, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another v Republic. The court held that sentencing must consider the offender's mitigation and personal circumstances. The Petitioner had served 21 years, demonstrated remorse, and shown evidence of reform by serving as a teacher and head boy in prison. The court determined that the period already served constituted sufficient punishment and ordered the Petitioner's immediate release unless otherwise lawfully held.
Court Disposition
petition allowed; petitioner resentenced to period served and released
Orders
- The Petitioner is sentenced to 21 years served.
- The Petitioner is hereby released and set free unless lawfully held for another cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MOMBASA
CONSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RIGHTS DIVISION
PETITION NO. 47 OF 2018
STEPHEN ASANGA KAZUNGU....................................................PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS.....................RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
1. The Petitioner herein was charged and convicted with the offence of Robbery with Violence contrary to Section 296(2) of the Penal Code. The Petitioner subsequently lodged a first appeal before the High Court and a second appeal in the Court of Appeal. Both appeals were dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 13/5/1997 at Changamwe within Coast province while armed with dangerous weapons violently robbed the complaints of Kshs. 75,000 and package of cigarettes. Being aggrieved by the sentence the Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeal at Mombasa which issued Judgment on 19th January 2001 dismissing the Appeal and enhanced the sentence to Mandatory Sentence of death.
3. The Petitioner now claims that the sentencing to death by the trial court as well as the two appellate courts was an infringement of his fundamental rights. The Petitioner avers that the death sentence issued by the Court of Appeal was cruel, inhuman and degrading.
4. The Petitioner further claims that the said courts did not consider his mitigation and as such the sentence is an infringement of the Petitioner’s rights under Articles 25 and Article 29 of the Constitution.
Hearing and Submissions
5. The parties filed their submissions and the Petition came up for hearing on 25th September, 2019.
6. It was the Petitioner’s submissions that he has reformed, is now a teacher in prison and makes clothes and uniforms worn in prison. He is also the head boy of the Shimo La Tewa prison. The Petitioner submitted that he should be sentenced to the 21 years he has served. The prosecution, on the other hand noted that although nobody was seriously injured in the robbery, the offence is grave and should be punished heavily with a sentence of 28 years.
The Determination
7. On the issue of sentence, this court relies on the Supreme Court case in Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another -vs- Republic [2017] eKLR declared where the mandatory nature of the death sentence as provided for under Section 204 of the Penal Code was found to be unconstitutional. To that extent this court can now resentence the Petitioner.
8. The Petitioner has already served 21 years in custody. He is remorseful. Further he serves as a Trustee in the prison and is currently the Head Boy. This shows that he has reformed and is in a position of responsibility which this court should consider.
9. Under the circumstances this court is satisfied that the 21 years behind the bars is sufficient punishment for the Petitioner.
10. The upshot is that the Petitioner is hereby sentenced to 21 years served, with the result that the Petitioner is hereby released and set free unless lawfully held.
Dated, Signed and Delivered at Mombasa this 5th day of November, 2019.
E. K. O. OGOLA
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Fedha for DPP
Petitioner in person
Mr. Kaunda Court Assistant