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
Decisions matching the current search
Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwafashe ko ubujurire bwa Nsabimana butakiriwe, Twahirwa ahamwa n’ubujura busanzwe, naho Ndungutse ahamwa n’ubujura bwitwaje intwaro ariko agabanyirizwa igihano.
The Court of Appeal upheld a life sentence for murder, finding no immediate provocation and holding that mitigating factors did not justify reduction.
The court found that the conviction was supported by consistent evidence: the appellant's confession during police investigation, corroborating witness testimony, and medical findings. The claim of duress was unsubstantiated. However, considering the appellant's youth, lack of prior convictions, and the nature of the offence, the sentence of life imprisonment was reduced to fifteen years' imprisonment.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld a defilement conviction, holding that the victim’s account, witness evidence, and medical evidence proved guilt, but reduced the sentence to 15 years.
Acceptance of guilt at the appellate stage does not qualify as a mitigating factor under the law; however, the appellant's youth and lack of prior convictions justify a reduction of sentence, balanced against the gravity and fatal consequences of the offence. The sentence is reduced accordingly under the more lenient law now in force.
Source excerpt
A Court of Appeal precedents collection summarizing criminal, civil, tax, and procedure rulings from July-August 2022, including sentencing, evidence, contracts, and appeal rules.
Court of Appeal upheld a 25-year sentence and RWF 21 million fine for heroin trafficking, holding the interpretive ministerial order applied retroactively.
Digest of Court of Appeal precedents from June to August 2023 covering evidence, sentencing, appeals, land, civil procedure, and auctions.
Mitigating circumstances, such as first-time offence and youth, allow reduction of sentence below statutory minimum or maximum for defilement of minors under 14, as the absolute bar on mitigation is unconstitutional. Acceptance of guilt is only mitigating if made unequivocally before closure of first instance trial. Courts retain discretion to determine appropriate sentence based on gravity and manner of offence. Confessions and witness statements from investigation are valid evidence unless convincingly rebutted. Testimony from victims or relatives is admissible if credible. In voided contra…
Source excerpt
The Supreme Court held that Article 84(4), Article 92 (insofar as it prohibits reduction of sentence for mitigating circumstances), and Article 133(3) of Law No 68/2018 are unconstitutional as they violate the principles of legality, fair trial, and judicial independence by being vague or unduly restricting judicial discretion. Articles 256 and 271 do not violate the Constitution as their limitations on expression and criminalization of counterfeit currency are justified and proportionate to legitimate aims.
Source excerpt
Explore more
