PROSECUTION v. UWINKINDI

PROSECUTION v. UWINKINDI

An indigent accused does not have the absolute right to choose his legal counsel; the competent organs may appoint counsel without the accused's participation when he lacks financial means. The appointment of counsel by the Rwanda Bar Association was lawful. The appeal was admissible but lacked merit.

Citation
RLR V. 4 - 2015
Parties
Prosecution: Prosecution; Appellant/accused: Uwinkindi Jean
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
24 April 2015
Case Number
RPA 0011/15/CS
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court decision upheld.
Legal Topics
Right to Legal Counsel, Right to Defence, Appointment of Counsel for Indigent Accused, Transfer of International Criminal Cases, Appeal Admissibility
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Right to Legal Counsel Right to Defence Appointment of Counsel for Indigent Accused Transfer of International Criminal Cases Appeal Admissibility

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prosecution

Prosecution

Uwinkindi Jean

Appellant/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an indigent accused has the absolute right to choose his legal counsel
  2. 2 Whether the appeal by Uwinkindi Jean was admissible
  3. 3 Whether the appointment of counsel by the Bar Association without the accused's participation was lawful

Ratio Decidendi

An indigent accused does not have the absolute right to choose his legal counsel; the competent organs may appoint counsel without the accused's participation when he lacks financial means. The appointment of counsel by the Rwanda Bar Association was lawful. The appeal was admissible but lacked merit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court decision upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal of Uwinkindi Jean is not valid.
  • The incident raised by the prosecution regarding non-admissibility of the appeal is not valid.