19750416 TZHC Mwanza

,LLJ.1J.,.. AT TAI'TZA Original hIGH COTJ FLT CRII.iINL LPPEJL N.O. 423 OF 1974 Original Crii:iinal Case No, 399 of 1973 of the District' Court of Goita.Difrict at Goita1oforo L.r'Lugiohana, Esci., DJ. ALflEI?TUS LiLGESA • . • . . . • • . • . . . . i.iJLLLNT versus THJ. REPtThIIC. . . ••• . • • . • • • . RESPONDEITT CHARGE: Corrupt transaction wit]:i agnt c/s 3 (1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 16/71 JJ1ENT LIIA, J. On 3/10/73, the Po1icat Scn -ororia in Gota District nounted a search for i1lict lijior' conrion],y Imovm as "noshi". In the course of this' search which was ordered by tho appellant AJJBEIITUS AGES. then officer , in-charge of Sengorea P011cc Phst, :ahy hones wore raided incjuding that of the coaplainant LEI'TSIANL JUMA (p'T2) Molonsiana told the trial court that as she vie,s sleeping that night,, she hparo a loud bang at the nain door of horiouso The door was' forced een and a party' of pelicenon ontrod the house. For reasons whiCh are not clear, she v;as assault- ed and rossly onhandled, end the cm culprit appears to h've been th ttpOI1nti Do that as it 'iay, they dor,endod to' lmow the w'b,ere- shouts of her husband. She told thc that ho had one to Thisism on lousinOss. Thoreupon they 'infoacd her that she had "moshi" in her ho' e end they picked a buc'ot containing soio liquid c1anng that tha.t.was ¶ioshi'. Despite her Drotosts that wat ,ias in' tho

'bucket e8 only water, th bi,,'ckot wos sizcJ an 1 she wos ordered tà caio iith thoi 'to the police station. .o they roro wolkin, to thc polic statien:-the appellant' signalled to her and aLed' her "what she' had to say". He whisporod to her that if she gavo hin Shs. 100/, ho could. :havo"her released. She told' hmn that she did not have thQ ncmey.'then, but that if he released 1cr, she ;wou1d brii.g the raoney thO' followinr norning. On thi 'undortanding the, appellant 'allOwed hOr. 'to return hue the night, but ho kept the bucket seized at her hone.' Eal thO following :oining she travellàd 'to 'Bus isi to sOc he husband so that ho could give hdr the nciaciy dd:'aandod by the appellant. She did n.t oo hi. as he had 'trav011od to another pJaOe on business. She returned hone and so:.:ehow :lanaged to get ,thc 5he ioo/' and took it to the appellant. On Oo'oing her 'the. appo'llant changed his :.ind, telling her that she was too 'late and thçit in ccnooquencc he had raised his "fee to Sha. 250/=. She mplorcd hira to tcJ.co' pity' 'on hor s saying that 5110 woulL n.'t be 'able 'tp raise that encunt. Finally he gave in and reduced the anount t shs., 200/=. As she pu-s it, luckily her husband returned thot sc e night and ohio told hin what had happened and what wac re'quirocl 'to secure her 'free- don. Her husband CHARLES I ZUKA (P. .10) told, the trio 1 court 'the t he was very

aumyod at this end he nqde up his nmnc,?. to travel to Mwanza 8,md report the appellant F'5 illegal donands On his,. wifO ., This ho 'did, and to the eternal credit of the office' of the RegiOnal Crifle Officer Mvianza Region, irnediato action was taken. A party of police officOrs led by1OYS 1Cb-hI3NDA (P.VT.1) was dOsiatched to Songerona in the conpony of the c onjlamnant husband.. BOforo 1eaving, the party was supplied with shs.': 200/' whose nurobors ad d.enor'iinations were n:ted dorm and 'as usual the currency notes were tr&Eted wita light reflecting powdor , ThOr then sot off for Songorera. At Songor'eroa they stopped at 'the ccnr'lainant's houc where thoy.haidod the treated currency notes to Melonsiana. But as' the' apollant had warned Molonsiana not to take the rooney to hin herself, it was arranged that her co-wife NYJd,TIZI d/o BIJHLBI (P.T1.3,) should take the nonoy to the app ellant, 'this was done after I'Tya;:iizi had qatabliohi- ed contact with the appellant. "\Thon Nysnizi loft on her :'ip'.on, she was shadowed by C'.I .D. agents frw'.i Mwanza. As arranged, she successfully handed the'rionoy to, thQ appellant at the police taticn. - As soon as tlis Was done, tho.policc officers o:iorgcd, introduced tha1vos and iii'cried t ea:olLant that they ouscted hi - i roccivind a•lribo.. Bo±'cro soarchin hin, they offered: the ttppollant the op'ortuiiity to eoarch i if he

wished. The appellant. ec1ino:. tho",offor. Throupon 1,I0YS 111CHU1TDA asked Dototivo Yüsni (P.1.7) to soa the appollant.. The' search rvealcd s. 200/= in the-ochut of ,ho appollantlz official uniforra. Their nubers.. there röcordod and ahoOkod. ' hoy vore f::und to tallj with the nunbors r:oorciod earlier. The appellant was then •arrostod and tc±on to Mwanza wcre ]pCdOT bests wer: carried - ut. Those worq positive. At this stae ho was taken c court to an\Ter the charc of corruption contrary GO soctIon 3 (1) ci' iii: Prevonin of Corruption J.Ct. At his trial 'In the ditrict court, the appellant told the court in his defence that he did n t do oaaythin' of the sort as allecd by the prosocuti.n witnesses. Ho however areed that ho ordered the search of )shi' t Senerc:a on 3/10/73 end that he personally led the search party. In the course of thp search, they entered the conplainent I house whore they found a bucket containin. water whichaolt like "weshi". They therefore aricstod the ccnplain-- ant and scizd the bucket. However on arrival at Sonerena police pOst, ho was satis&ic[ that the bucket-did not contain "noslü". 110 therefore ordered the release of th co:iplainqnt, but warned her to rop'rt back the :rollowin noThing. The 'comp1ainant failed to turi up on th following day i.e. 4/10/73 her co-wife P.1.3 arrived nd told hin that she was sent by the coriplcinaaat to collect

her huckot but as ho - did net ]rnaw Iicr he refused. 'Thiring tho ovelaing of' bhc sane day at about 7 or 3'p.:.. P.C. STJELI (P.1.9) called at his house and asked' nra to cone cut. then he did he was riOdiato1y surrounded by police:apn: who tdd hin that they suspctcd hta. ;They pretended to 'sorch him, but one of thor: ioduced shs200/ 'ed'put it on tho table • He was 1'tcr tak. n to G-ei a anç. £\Jan,a. In conclusion he denibd that any trscos of powdOr wore foun,d on his hands, but only in his poc1ets and this ho said had bp'on dóosit,od thecc by the police officers at tlic uine they ceercheci hin. ':tr rovicuing: the evienco the trial rfagis t rato accepted the 'proocution case and found tli---)- t the appellant had dorandod some consideration from the complainantso that he could dolher a favour • connected' with his offidial duties. He. rejected the appellant's version Of c -ent, ho inevitably found him guilty, , convicted and sentenced him to three yoars impriconnOnt. Thor appollOnt than lodged this appeal against that finding. • ...... I i satisfied that boforo one can accopt.t10 ai5rollant's version of events, one a::ust accept the existence at the time of a massive cenopiraQy to implicate him. This conspiracy of necessity nust,:have involved the office of the Regienal Crime Officer at Mianza. I find this posshilty non-existent. :Vhy should rosponsil:l:. -polico officers

cens -nire with civi1ian to frame up a-cc1lcaio? If the police officorS werö capable of such a onspirocy', why shou.lJ the ceiplainant an ordinary villacr involve herself in official intrigues? I do net think there are reasonable -roimds on which one can reject the eviaenco 01 ltlelonsiana that soon aiter her arrost: that night, the appellant riado appreachos to her for sono consideration to secure her 'oloaso. That following this approach chic re)ertd t her husband : ho in burn conplaincd to T\rnnza. Ther'- can also bO no good roasoxis or rejobing'Nyo1aizi's evidence that sho, personally handod the r:ciaoy • to the appellant, although . think she should also havc.becn escd foxpo; - dor to ofioctively estahl,sn that shc hanod- the trca-ted curronoy n'tc5,. But I am satisfied: - that she, was a truthful vitness and hor cvidoncc was rightly aceepted by tho trial court - - : ' •, ''. - - ' '- ' • '- 'The apcllant stongly .irótest'od that :sts forpowder were positive on his' hands. '-. 1 think he nay b ±i::ht in this, for the tc:sts wore carried out the following day. Surely in the meantime ho could have lashed - br erased thol, _11 But \rhiilC it i5 possible that - some powder 'in his hkots 1. -'could have -been 'left there at the search, still 1 an saticf'ied that this was unlikely and in any cace as I have stated i;hore was no reason sugosi;ed to explain -i why ALOYS ACHU1DA and

his colloaçu.es should have decided to travel 11 the way iron t•ariza -bo Soncrona soiciy for the purpose of dopositing Shs. 200/= in the appellant's pockets. For these reasons, I an satisfied that the case against the appellant was sufficiently proved in the trial court, that he solicited and aocoijtod a bribe f:rcn the ocnplainant and that ho did so in his capacity as an agent of the G-ovornn.ont his onployors. He was therefore rightly convicted snd sontoncod. Accordingly this ap'poal is disnissod. Dolivorod in Court at Mwonza this 16th day of April., 1975. i. L. MFLILL 16th April, 1975. JUDGE