UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MBABAJENDE N’ABANDI

UBUSHINJACYAHA v. MBABAJENDE N’ABANDI

The Supreme Court held that, although the prosecution filed the case within the legal period, no procedural or investigative acts were performed for over ten years after the last act on 17/01/1994, except for a suspension during the genocide. The subsequent referral to the High Court occurred after prescription had already run. Therefore, the criminal action was prescribed, and the lower court erred in entertaining the case.

Citation
RLR V.2-2016
Parties
Prosecution: Ubushinjacyaha; Accused: Mbabajende Jean Baptiste; Appellant: Ntuyenabo Simon; Appellant: Kamuhanda Théoneste; Accused: Nzamwita Félicien; Accused: Uwizeyumuremyi Claude
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
11 December 2015
Case Number
RPA0148/11/CS
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; lower court judgment set aside due to prescription.
Legal Topics
Prescription of Criminal Action, Procedural Time Limits, Effect of Inaction on Prosecution, Suspension of Prescription Due to Force Majeure
Source Language
en, rw
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Prescription of Criminal Action Procedural Time Limits Effect of Inaction on Prosecution Suspension of Prescription Due to Force Majeure

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

Parties

Ubushinjacyaha

Prosecution

Mbabajende Jean Baptiste

Accused

Ntuyenabo Simon

Appellant

Kamuhanda Théoneste

Appellant

Nzamwita Félicien

Accused

Uwizeyumuremyi Claude

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the criminal action was time-barred (prescribed) at the time of trial
  2. 2 Whether investigative or procedural acts interrupted or suspended prescription
  3. 3 Whether the lower court erred in entertaining a prescribed criminal case

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that, although the prosecution filed the case within the legal period, no procedural or investigative acts were performed for over ten years after the last act on 17/01/1994, except for a suspension during the genocide. The subsequent referral to the High Court occurred after prescription had already run. Therefore, the criminal action was prescribed, and the lower court erred in entertaining the case.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; lower court judgment set aside due to prescription.

Orders

  • The judgment of the High Court, Rwamagana Chamber, of 6/5/2011 is set aside.
  • The criminal action is declared prescribed.