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 accused was properly convicted of drug trafficking because he was apprehended transporting a significant quantity of cannabis for another person in exchange for payment, which constitutes trafficking under the law. The sentence of 15 years' imprisonment and a fine of 5,000,000 RWF was the minimum allowed by law after mitigation, and no further reduction is warranted.
Source excerpt
The appeal was filed after the three-day statutory period for urgent auction matters, as required by Article 188 of Law No 22/2018 and established case law. The appeal was therefore inadmissible, and no further substantive issues were considered.
Source excerpt
The large quantity of cannabis and evidence that the accused was transporting it for another person established the offence of trafficking, not mere possession. The sentence reduction by the High Court was justified by mitigating factors, but further reduction or reclassification was unwarranted.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that Nyiraminani Josée had already received a sufficient sentence reduction and was not entitled to a further reduction on appeal.
The evidence, including the defendant's admissions and witness testimony, established that Nsengiyumva Emmanuel was engaged in drug trafficking, not mere possession for personal use. The sentence imposed by the High Court was appropriate and sufficiently mitigated; no further reduction was warranted.
Source excerpt
The appellate court held that the testimony of the 10-year-old victim, corroborated by other witnesses and the medical report, was credible and sufficient to uphold the conviction. The court found no procedural or evidentiary errors in the lower courts' assessment and rejected the appellant's claims of bias and insufficiency of evidence.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because Abunzubumwe Ltd filed its claim after the statutory limitation period, which is calculated from the date of the first administrative complaint. Subsequent complaints do not reset the limitation period. The High Court correctly rejected the claim as time-barred.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that the High Court properly applied the law and considered all mitigating circumstances, imposing the minimum sentence of 15 years as prescribed by the amended statute; no legal error or abuse of discretion was demonstrated, so the appeal lacked merit.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed Mugabonake Vedaste’s conviction appeal as to guilt, but reduced his sentence from life imprisonment to 25 years.
The Court of Appeal held that convicting Iyamuremye Jean Claude for attacks at Gatarasi Thaddée and DCA, which were not specified in the indictment, violated his right to be informed of the charges. However, the conviction for genocide based on his participation in the Kicukiro Health Center and Nyanza attacks was upheld, as the evidence from key witnesses was found credible despite minor inconsistencies, and the specific intent for genocide was established. The sentence was reduced to 20 years, considering his youth at the time, his non-leadership role, and some mitigating acts.
Source excerpt
Explore more
