Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TZHC

20110908 TZHC Dar es Salaam

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The trial was vitiated by a fatal procedural irregularity as the pleas of the appellants were not individually recorded and the record was silent on the opportunity to object to the translator, especially given the language barrier.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • decision of the trial court quashed
  • sentence set aside
  • case to commence afresh before another magistrate of competent jurisdiction

02

Material facts

Parties

Abdallah Ally Ghuhad and 5 Others

Appellant

Republic

Respondent Counsel: Mr. Mhina State Attorney

Amounts and remedies

  • Prison Term (count 1): months 6
  • Prison Term (count 2): years 5

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellants challenged the conviction and sentence on grounds including improper plea recording and language barrier.
Respondent
The respondent, represented by Mr. Mangoi, resisted the appeal.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    General principles of criminal procedure

    Each accused must have their plea recorded individually and in detail, especially when tried together.

  2. 02

    Criminal procedure requirements

    Accused persons must be given an opportunity to object to the translator and the record must reflect this.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The trial was vitiated by a fatal procedural irregularity as the pleas of the appellants were not individually recorded and the record was silent on the opportunity to object to the translator, especially given the language barrier.

Court disposition

appeal allowed

  • decision of the trial court quashed
  • sentence set aside
  • case to commence afresh before another magistrate of competent jurisdiction

Source and reliance status

TZHC · 8 September 2011

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

TZHC

Judgment· 8 September 2011

20110908 TZHC Dar es Salaam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA

AT DAR ES SALAAM CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 43 0~ 2011 (Originating from Resident Magistrates Court Kibaha at \ Kibaha Cr Case No.· 5/ 20;11)

ABDULLAH ALLY GHUHAD AND 5 OTHERS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . APPELLANT

VERSUS REPUBLIC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RESPONDENT Date of last Order: 05/09/2011 Date of Judgment: 08/09/2011

JUDGMENT KARUA, J. The six appellants, namely, Abdallah Ally Ghuhad, Mohamed Abuhar Touryai, Mohamed Hassan Mohamed, Mohamed Abdulkarim Farah, Jibril Abdul Aadan and Noor Ali Hussein, were jointly arraigned before the Court of 1 .., Resident Magistrate at Kibaha as the 1st , 2nd, 3rct, 4th, 5th, and 6 th accused, respectively, on two counts of being unlawfully present in the country and unlawful possession of ammunitions, contrary to Section 31 ( 1)(i) and (2) of the Immigration Act, Cap 54, RE 2002; and Section 4 (1) and 34 (1) (2) of the Arms and Ammunitions Act, Cap 223, RE 2002, as amended. The appellants pleaded guilty to the crimes and were convicted as charged. They were then .._ _, sentenced to serve a prison term of 6 months and 5 years, ·-- respectively. The conviction and sentence aggrieved the appellants, hence, this appeal, which was resisted by Mr. Mangoi, on behalf of the Republic. The appellants preferred six grounds of complaint against their conviction and sentence. However, before considering the merits and demerits of the appeal, I am 11 • satisfied that the trial was caught up with one fatal ' ',I procedural irregularity. As demonstrated, the record reveals that appellants pleaded guilty to the crime. However, the plea of all the appellants, were put together in one lamp without regard to particulars or details of what each the appellant had said. The

record subscribe that in the 1st count, the 1st to 6 th accused said in unison, "it is 2 -- rr----- • true", and in the second count, the same style was recorded by the trial magistrate. It is not known what exactly the 2 nd , 3 rd ,4 th and 5 th appellants said. With respect, I am of the considered view that this type of plea recording is questionable. Indeed, the word used, "it is true", represented an affirmative answer to a question. However, the type of plea recording is displeasing as noted it is caught with some doubtful characteristics, because as ~ said, it is not known if the answer was put to all of them simultaneously and the answer, likewise. It is the duty of the presiding magistrate, to take the plea from each accused, when tried together and the trial magistrate, must record the plea of what each accused said, one after ' another. Moreover, in view of the language barrier, which was imminent in this case, I do not think every constituent of the charge were pointed out. The record is silent. This .~: is more important because the appellants were only versed in Somali language and their exception, against the translator, might as well, be true, since the record again is silent, as to whether the appellant were offered an opportunity to take exception against the translator. 3 ... For the foregone technical reasons, I allow this appeal, quash the decision of the trial court, set aside the sentence and I accordingly order that this case commence a fresh •. before another magistrate of competent jurisdictions. It is so ordered and directed.

JUDGE 08/09/2011

DATED AT DAR ES SALAAM Appearances: For the appellants: All present in person For the respondent: Mr. Mhina State Attorney 4

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Immigration Act, Cap 54, RE 2002, Section 31(1)(i) and (2)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Arms and Ammunitions Act, Cap 223, RE 2002, Section 4(1) and 34(1)(2)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.