UBUSHINJACYAHA v BAZAMBANZA

UBUSHINJACYAHA v BAZAMBANZA

The Court held that the testimony of Mukamukama Béatrice does not constitute new evidence within the meaning of Article 197, as the issue of Maman Queen was already raised and litigated in previous proceedings, and the testimony lacks the decisive character required to overturn the prior judgment. Therefore, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
RS/REV/RP 00060/2024/CA
Parties
Applicant: Ubushinjacyaha; Respondent: Bazambanza Omar
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Rwanda
Judgment Date
30 December 2025
Case Number
RS/REV/RP 00060/2024/CA
Procedural Posture
Criminal Revision / Application for Review Based on New Evidence
Outcome
Application for review dismissed as inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, New Evidence, Drug Trafficking, Procedural Bars
Source Language
rw
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Review of Judgment New Evidence Drug Trafficking Procedural Bars

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Ubushinjacyaha

Applicant

Bazambanza Omar

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Revision / Application for Review Based on New Evidence

  1. 1 Whether the application for review based on new evidence by Bazambanza Omar should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the testimony of Mukamukama Béatrice does not constitute new evidence within the meaning of Article 197, as the issue of Maman Queen was already raised and litigated in previous proceedings, and the testimony lacks the decisive character required to overturn the prior judgment. Therefore, the application for review is inadmissible.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed as inadmissible.

Orders

  • The application for review based on new evidence is not admitted.
  • The previous judgment remains in force.