S v Mbele (CRIMINAL 4 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 16 (1 February 2011)

S v Mbele (CRIMINAL 4 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 16 (1 February 2011)

The conviction was improper because the accused did not admit, nor did the State prove, that he was not a Namibian citizen or otherwise lawfully in Namibia, which is an essential element of the offence under s 29(1)(a) of the Immigration and Control Act, 1993.

Citation
[2011] NAHC 16
Parties
Prosecution: The State; Accused: Julius Mbele
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
1 February 2011
Case Number
CRIMINAL 4 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / High Court Review Judgment
Outcome
Conviction and sentence set aside
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Elements of Offence, Immigration Status
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Immigration Law Burden of Proof Elements of Offence Immigration Status

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Prosecution

Julius Mbele

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / High Court Review Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's status as a non-Namibian or unlawfully present person was proved or admitted as required under s 29(1)(a) of the Immigration and Control Act, 1993.

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was improper because the accused did not admit, nor did the State prove, that he was not a Namibian citizen or otherwise lawfully in Namibia, which is an essential element of the offence under s 29(1)(a) of the Immigration and Control Act, 1993.

Court Disposition

Conviction and sentence set aside

Orders

  • The conviction and sentence of the accused is set aside.
  • If the accused paid the fine imposed, it should be refunded to him.