UBUSHINJACYAHA v MUKARWEGO N’UNDI

UBUSHINJACYAHA v MUKARWEGO N’UNDI

The appellants were not tried or acquitted in DRC, as there was no evidence they were summoned or heard, nor any judgment acquitting them. Therefore, ne bis in idem does not apply. The conviction for complicity in murder is supported by consistent and corroborated witness statements and lawfully obtained telephone records, which establish the appellants' involvement beyond reasonable doubt. Minor contradictions in witness statements do not negate their evidentiary value. The appeal lacks merit.

Citation
RPAA 00255/2024/CA
Parties
Prosecution: Ubushinjacyaha; Appellant/accused: Mukarwego Ngarambe Médiatrice; Appellant/accused: Ntabwoba Jean de Dieu alias Doudou
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
27 September 2024
Case Number
RPAA 00255/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
Legal Topics
Double Jeopardy (ne Bis in Idem), Evidentiary Value of Witness Testimony, Conspiracy and Accomplice Liability, Procedural Fairness, Admissibility of Telecommunications Evidence
Source Language
rw
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Double Jeopardy (ne Bis in Idem) Evidentiary Value of Witness Testimony Conspiracy and Accomplice Liability Procedural Fairness Admissibility of Telecommunications Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ubushinjacyaha

Prosecution

Mukarwego Ngarambe Médiatrice

Appellant/accused

Ntabwoba Jean de Dieu alias Doudou

Appellant/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were previously tried and acquitted in DRC, barring prosecution in Rwanda under ne bis in idem.
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for complicity in murder was supported by sufficient and legally obtained evidence.
  3. 3 Whether the witness testimonies and telephone records were properly admitted and assessed.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants were not tried or acquitted in DRC, as there was no evidence they were summoned or heard, nor any judgment acquitting them. Therefore, ne bis in idem does not apply. The conviction for complicity in murder is supported by consistent and corroborated witness statements and lawfully obtained telephone records, which establish the appellants' involvement beyond reasonable doubt. Minor contradictions in witness statements do not negate their evidentiary value. The appeal lacks merit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.

Orders

  • Prosecution's appeal on the charge of complicity in forming a criminal gang is withdrawn and accepted.
  • Appellants' appeal is dismissed as unfounded.