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 rwasanze igihano cya 15 cy’imyaka cyari gito gishoboka ku cyaha cyo gusambanya umwana no kubana na we, bityo ubujurire ntibufite ishingiro.
Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwemeje ko igihano cy’imyaka 15 cyari gito gishoboka ku cyaha cyo gusambanya umwana uri munsi y’imyaka 14, bityo ubujurire ntibufite shingiro.
Urukiko rw’Ubujurire rwemeje ko igihano cy’imyaka 15 cyari gito giteganywa n’amategeko, bityo ubujurire bwo kongera kukigabanyiriza nta shingiro bufite.
The minimum sentence for defilement followed by cohabitation with a minor, where mitigating circumstances are present, is 15 years' imprisonment. Since Niragire Jean Paul had already received this minimum, the sentence could not be further reduced or suspended. No error was found in the lower court's application of the law.
Source excerpt
The minimum sentence of 15 years for defilement followed by cohabitation with a minor, where mitigating circumstances are established, was correctly applied by the High Court; further reduction is not legally permissible.
Source excerpt
The minimum sentence for sexual assault with mitigating circumstances is 15 years imprisonment; further reduction is not permitted by law. Applicant's mitigating arguments do not justify lowering the sentence below the statutory minimum.
Source excerpt
The appellant's admission of guilt was already considered by the High Court in reducing the sentence from life imprisonment to 25 years. No credible evidence of provocation was presented, and the issue was not raised at trial, making it inadmissible on appeal. The High Court did not err in its sentencing discretion, and no further mitigation was warranted.
Source excerpt
Micomyiza Christophe's admission of guilt was considered and resulted in mitigation from life imprisonment to 25 years. No credible evidence of provocation was presented at trial, and new grounds raised on appeal regarding provocation cannot be considered. The sentence imposed by the High Court was appropriate given the brutality of the crime and the circumstances.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that first-time admission of guilt on appeal does not justify further sentence reduction where the lower courts already mitigated the penalty.
The Court of Appeal held that a crime punishable by life imprisonment may not be reduced below 15 years, and dismissed the appeal.
Explore more
