PROSESECUTION V. DUSENGIMANA

# PROSESECUTION V. DUSENGIMANA

- Source: Amategeko - Section: Decisions (Judgements) - Date: 2017-11-17 - Case/document no.: RPAA 0001/14/CS - Collection: Supreme Court

## Text

## Page 1

PROSECUTION v. DUSENGIMANA [Rwanda SUPREME COURT- 2013SC – RPAA0150/10/CS (Mugenzi, P.J., Mukandamage and Munyangeri, J.) December,12th 2013] Criminal law – Child defilement – standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Facts: The appellant was charged with the offense of child defilement to a 3years old child, before the Intermediate Court of Rubavu that found him guilty of the offense and sentenced him with life imprisonment and a fine of one hundred Rwandan francs due to his plea of guilty before the judicial police and before the prosecution. The defendant appealed in the High Court, Chamber of Musanze that ruled that the decision of the appealed case remains in force. He appealed before the Supreme Court saying that he pleaded guilty due to the torture committed to him when he was interrogated without counsel, the fact that there is no expert evidence showing that the offense was committed, the fact that the witnesses he provided have not been interrogated. Held: The appellant does not prove that his witnesses would assert that he didn’t commit the offense. Saying that he had been with others laying bricks, as raised in the Supreme Court does not mean that at his arrival at his home, he didn’t commit the defilement. Appeal dismissed. the decision of the appealed case remains in force, with costs to the public treasury. Statutes and statutory instruments referred to: Law No 13/ 2004 of 17th May 2004 relating to the Code of Criminal Procedure, art. 153 Law No 27/2001of 28th April, 2001 relating to the rights and protection of child against violence, art. 33 and 34 No Cases referred to: Judgment I. Brief background of the case

## Page 2

[1] The Intermediate Court of Rubavu convicted Dusengimana Jean Claude of the offense of child defilement and sentenced him with life imprisonment and a fine of one hundred thousand Rwandan Francs basing on that he pleaded guilty of the offense before the Judicial Police and before the prosecution. [2] Dusengimana appealed in the High Court, Chamber of Musanze that ruled that the decision of the appealed case remains in force since he pleaded guilty of the offense in prosecution and didn’t say that he has been tortured as he said he was tortured in judicial police, but also he does not prove that he was beaten. [3] Once again, he appealed in the Supreme Court, intending to plead that what he said in the investigating bodies was due to torture committed to him during interrogations without counsel. He also said that he was convicted without the expert evidence proving that the offense was committed, that the witnesses he provided have never been interrogated and that he was falsely charged of the offense by his accuser due to hatred. [4] The case was tried in public on 14th November,2012 , Dusengimana assisted by the counsel of MURUTASIBE Joseph while the prosecution was represented by Alain MUKURALINDA II. The legal issue to be examined in the case and its analysis To know if there is incriminating evidence that Dusengimana Jean Claude committed the alleged offense. [5] Dusengimana and his counsel MURUTASIBE Joseph say that he has been tortured in the Judicial Police, the fact that there is no expert evidence proving that there has been child defilement upon the child and the witnesses provided by him have never been interrogated to prove that he had been falsely convicted due to hatred. [6] They added that what he said in the prosecution cannot be considered since he was interrogated without counsel and that the fact that the expert evidence is missing in the case file is due to that the investigating bodies met that in case of that, he should be innocent, therefore, they think that there is doubt as provided by article 153 of the Law relating to the Code of Criminal Procedure [7] Concerning the expert evidence, the representative of the prosecution says that it’s not the only evidence the court should base on, especially that the accused pleaded guilty. [8] Concerning the fact that the policeman who interrogated him in the first place might have beaten him, he says that, that ground of appeal is not valid since there is no ground of beating the accused who considering that he pleaded guilty of the offense. [9] Concerning the fact that he was interrogated without counsel, the representative of the prosecution says that having been interrogated without counsel is not the ground for telling the truth of how he committed the offense since he didn’t plead guilty in courts while he had no counsel, and then he finds that this cannot be the ground of rejecting what he said.

## Page 3

[10] The statements of interrogations of Dusengimana in the prosecution and the judicial police prove that he pleaded guilty of the offense and explained how he committed it, and what he says that he pleaded guilty due to torture and that he has been falsely convicted by the mother of the child whom the child defilement was committed to due to hatred do not have any evidence, especially that he didn’t mention that he has been tortured in the prosecution. In addition to this, he wants to base on the lack of the expert evidence in the case file to prove his innocence while it is not the only evidence incriminating him the offense, such as to be incriminated by the child and his plea of guilty. [11] Concerning the non interrogation of the witnesses, the representative of the prosecution says that there has never been denial of the request in any court to interrogate the witnesses as it is provided by article 66 of the Law relating to evidence and its production that provides that in case there are facts, which seeks to prove by using witnesses ,shall be indicated in a precise and succinct manner.The Court in it’s own motion,analyze if it is pertinent,relavant and admissible.The Court finds that Dusengimana doesn’t prove that the witnesses would prove that he was not guilty of the offense and the fact that he has been with others forming bricks ,as raised in this court doesn’t mean that at his arrival at home ,after leaving them ,he shouldn’t commit child defilement .This ground of appeal is therefore not valid. III. COURT’S ORDER [12] Rules that the appeal of Dusengimana Jean Claude is not valid. [13] Rules that the appealed case remains in force [14] Orders that the court fees are for the account of the public treasury since the sentenced person is jailed.