Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Rwanda decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
The Court of Appeal held that witness testimony and a medical report, taken together, proved defilement of a minor and dismissed the appeal.
The conviction was upheld because the evidence from the accused's own statements, the victim's mother, an eyewitness, and the medical report collectively established beyond reasonable doubt that Nshimiyimana Jacques committed the offence of defilement. The court found the defence arguments unconvincing and the evidence consistent with the legal definition of the crime. However, the sentence was reduced to 18 years' imprisonment due to mitigating factors, including it being the accused's first offence and his young age at the time.
Source excerpt
__CONTENT_FILTERED__
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court dismissed Nyirinkindi Amiel’s retrial-for-injustice request, holding he proved neither damage from the power line nor any basis for new claims.
The applicant failed to provide credible, non-speculative evidence that the electricity pylons or transmission line caused compensable harm or prevented the use of his land for its designated agricultural purpose. The applicant's claims for compensation and removal of pylons are unsupported by admissible evidence. New claims regarding relocation cannot be entertained in a review for injustice as they were not raised in prior proceedings.
Source excerpt
The court held that the statutory minimum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment for the offense of trafficking in narcotics, as set by Article 2 of Law No 059/2023, is binding and cannot be reduced further by the court, even in the presence of mitigating circumstances. The previous jurisprudence allowing for reductions below the statutory minimum was superseded by the new law.
Source excerpt
The conviction was upheld because multiple forms of evidence—including the appellant's confession at the prosecution and trial court levels, the victim's testimony, corroborating witness statements, and medical reports—established guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant's claims of duress and illiteracy were unsubstantiated and raised only at the appellate stage. However, the sentence was reduced from 20 to 17 years' imprisonment in line with precedent for first-time offenders.
Source excerpt
The High Court upheld a bribery conviction, holding that a single credible witness can suffice and that an unsigned seizure report does not invalidate the evidence.
The sentence imposed on Hitimana Issa (15 years imprisonment and a fine of 5,000,000 Frw) is the statutory minimum permitted after considering mitigating circumstances, and cannot be further reduced or suspended under the applicable laws.
Source excerpt
Explore more
