S v Shikunga (SA 6 of 1995) [1997] NASC 2 (20 August 1997)
The appeal is dismissed because, despite the unconstitutional admission of the confession, the conviction was justified on other reliable evidence and objective facts. Section 217(1)(b)(ii) is unconstitutional, but the irregularity did not taint the verdict. The sentence imposed was appropriate given the facts and the nature of the attack.
- Citation
- [1997] NASC 2
- Parties
- Appellant: Immanuel Shikunga; Respondent: The State
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Namibia
- Judgment Date
- 20 August 1997
- Case Number
- SA 6 of 1995
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Robbery, Confession Admissibility, Constitutional Rights, Fair Trial, Onus of Proof, Sentencing
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Immanuel Shikunga
Appellant
The State
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court erred in admitting a confession under section 217(1)(b)(ii) of Act 51 of 1977
- 2 Whether section 217(1)(b)(ii) is unconstitutional under the Namibian Constitution
- 3 Whether the conviction can stand despite the constitutional irregularity
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed because, despite the unconstitutional admission of the confession, the conviction was justified on other reliable evidence and objective facts. Section 217(1)(b)(ii) is unconstitutional, but the irregularity did not taint the verdict. The sentence imposed was appropriate given the facts and the nature of the attack.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal of the second accused against his convictions and sentence is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment