[2020] KEHC 6967 (KLR)
The court found that the trial court's failure to specify the language used by each witness and the accused persons during the proceedings was a fundamental breach of both statutory and constitutional provisions. Sections 197 and 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as well as Article 50(2)(m) of the Constitution,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 6967 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Stephen Okoth Ahindu; Appellant: Morris Odhiambo Ahindu; Appellant: Thadayo Ahindu Ahindu; Respondent: Republic
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Siaya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Appeal 57,58 & 59 of 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- conviction quashed, sentence set aside, retrial ordered
- Judges
- RE Aburili
- Legal Topics
- Right to Fair Trial, Language of Proceedings, Interpretation Services, Procedural Irregularity
- 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 Okoth Ahindu
Appellant
Morris Odhiambo Ahindu
Appellant
Thadayo Ahindu Ahindu
Appellant
Republic
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the failure to indicate the language used by witnesses and accused persons rendered the trial fatally defective.
- 2 Whether the accused persons' constitutional and statutory rights to interpretation and fair trial were violated.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial court's failure to specify the language used by each witness and the accused persons during the proceedings was a fundamental breach of both statutory and constitutional provisions. Sections 197 and 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as well as Article 50(2)(m) of the Constitution, require that an accused person be informed of the language used and be provided with interpretation services if necessary. The record merely indicated 'English / Swahili / Dholuo' as languages of interpretation but did not specify which language was actually used by each participant. This omission undermined the accused persons' right to a fair trial and proper interpretation,...
Court Disposition
conviction quashed, sentence set aside, retrial ordered
Orders
- The convictions of the appellants are quashed.
- The sentences imposed are set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT SIAYA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 57 OF 2019
[CONSOLIDATED WITH HCCRA NO. 58/2019 AND HCCRA 59/2019]
(CORAM: R. E. ABURILI - J.)
STEPHEN OKOTH AHINDU..................1ST APPELLANT
MORRIS ODHIAMBO AHINDU............2ND APPELLANT
THADAYO AHINDU AHINDU................3RD APPELLANT
VERSUS
REPUBLIC......................................................RESPONDENT
(Being an Appeal against conviction and sentence in Criminal Case No. 1055 of 2018 in the Principal Magistrate’s Court, Bondo dated 22. 7.2019 before Hon. E.N. Wasike, Senior Resident Magistrate)
JUDGMENT
1. Upon considering the proceedings and evidence adduced before Hon. E.N. Wasike, SRM Bondo, I note that the court did not indicate the language in which the witnesses and or even the accused person testified. This is contrary to Sections 197 and 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 50(2)(m) of the Constitution which guarantees the accused person the right to have the assistance of an interpreter without payment if the accused person cannot understand the language used at the trial.
2. Those are fundamental substantive statutory and constitutional provisions. The trial court record shows interpretation as English / Swahili / Dholuo but it is not indicated which of the 3 languages were used by any of the witnesses or the accused.
3. For the above reasons, I find and hold that the trial of the accused person was fatally defective. The conviction is quashed and sentence set aside for retrial of the accused persons for the same offence before Bondo PM’s court.
4. Mention on 13/3/2020 before Bondo Principal Magistrate’s for further directions. Appellants remanded in custody until then and until further directions of the court.
Dated, signed and delivered at Siaya, this 3rd day of March, 2020.
R.E. ABURILI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Appellant in person
Mr. Okachi, SPPC for State
Court Assistants: Ishmael Orwa and Modestar Mutiemani