Namibia Case Law

Mukwangu v S (HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 42 of 2022)

Mukwangu v S (HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 42 of 2022) [2022] NAHCMD 605 (7 November 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 42 of 2022

The appellants were adequately informed of their right to legal representation and made an informed decision to represent themselves. The failure to inform them of their right to docket disclosure was an irregularity but did not prejudice them as they intended to plead guilty from the outset. The charges were sufficiently particularised and not defective. The sentences imposed were startlingly inappropriate as the fines were far beyond the appellants' means, effectively resulting in direct imprisonment contrary to established sentencing principles. The appeal against conviction was dismissed,…

Source excerpt

• Controlled wildlife products and trade act
• Prevention of organized crime act
• Right to legal representation
• Docket disclosure
• Sentencing guidelines
• Appeal procedure

Read case analysis

S v Gotlieb and Others (CC 19 of 2017)

S v Gotlieb and Others (CC 19 of 2017) [2022] NAHCMD 92 (7 March 2022)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CC 19 of 2017

The High Court held that identification parade evidence was inadmissible because the accused’s right to apply for legal aid was not documented and not proved to have been properly explained.

• Right to legal representation
• Identification parade
• Legal aid
• Fair trial
• Right-to-legal-representation
• Legal-aid

Read case analysis

S v Erastus (7)

S v Erastus (7) (CRIMINAL 48 of 2021) [2021] NAHCMD 259 (27 May 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CRIMINAL 48 of 2021

The trial court failed to confirm the status of the accused's legal aid application, resulting in a violation of his right to legal representation and rendering the proceedings irregular and not in accordance with justice.

Source excerpt

• Right to legal representation
• Irregularity in criminal proceedings
• Setting aside conviction

Read case analysis

S v Oubiteb

S v Oubiteb (CRIMINAL 36 of 2021) [2021] NAHCMD 219 (10 May 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CRIMINAL 36 of 2021

The failure to inform the unrepresented accused of his right to legal representation and to record such explanation taints the conviction, rendering the proceedings not in accordance with justice.

Source excerpt

• Right to legal representation
• Criminal procedure
• Fair trial

Read case analysis

S v Johannes (5)

S v Johannes (5) (CRIMINAL 31 of 2021) [2021] NAHCMD 214 (10 May 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CRIMINAL 31 of 2021

The proceedings were vitiated by irregularities: failure to confirm the accused's waiver of legal representation and improper reliance on disputed previous convictions without proof, infringing the accused's constitutional rights and statutory protections.

Source excerpt

• Right to legal representation
• Proof of previous convictions
• Irregularity in criminal proceedings

Read case analysis

S v Haraseb (4)

S v Haraseb (4) (CRIMINAL 34 of 2021) [2021] NAHCMD 217 (10 May 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CRIMINAL 34 of 2021

On review, the High Court set aside a conviction and sentence after finding the record unclear, procedurally irregular, and insufficient to show a fair trial.

• Housebreaking
• Theft
• Right to legal representation
• Record keeping
• Fair trial
• Irregularities in proceedings

Read case analysis

S v Kativa

S v Kativa (CRIMINAL 27 of 2021) [2021] NAHCMD 173 (20 April 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CRIMINAL 27 of 2021

The High Court set aside a conviction for illicit cigarettes after finding serious review irregularities in the first appearance, charge framing, and guilty plea questioning.

• Illicit cigarettes
• Procedural irregularity
• Right to legal representation
• Charge particulars
• Section 112(1)(b) cpa
• Criminal-review

Read case analysis

State v Du Plessis (CC 13 of 2019)

State v Du Plessis (CC 13 of 2019) [2021] NAHCMD 102 (9 March 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CC 13 of 2019

In a trial-within-a-trial, the High Court ruled a warning statement inadmissible after finding the accused’s right to legal representation was not properly respected.

• Admissibility of evidence
• Right to legal representation
• Warning statement
• Pre-trial procedure
• Warning-statement
• Right-to-legal-representation

Read case analysis

S v Chimoso

S v Chimoso (CRIMINAL 1314 of 2020) [2021] NAHCMD 37 (11 February 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

CRIMINAL 1314 of 2020

The conviction and sentence were set aside because the accused was not afforded his constitutional right to legal representation as previously elected, and the charge sheet was defective, lacking sufficient particulars to inform the accused of the nature of the charge, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.

Source excerpt

• Right to legal representation
• Fair trial
• Defective charge sheet
• Immigration offences

Read case analysis

Booysen v State (HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 74 of 2020)

Booysen v State (HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 74 of 2020) [2021] NAHCMD 153 (8 February 2021)

Court

High Court Main Division

Case number

HC-MD-CRI-APP-CAL 74 of 2020

The appellant was denied a fair trial due to being coerced to testify while unrepresented and unprepared, after his counsel withdrew, and the magistrate refused a postponement to allow new counsel. This constituted a fundamental irregularity that vitiated the proceedings.

Source excerpt

• Right to legal representation
• Fair trial
• Postponement of trial
• Condonation for late filing

Read case analysis