19890601 TZCA Mbeya

-- \ ·:1~~ IN THE COUltT OF APP15AL QF TANZMUA J "t I I l - AT MBEYA • ~<IORAM: NYALALI 2 C. J •, MAKAME_,,._J~.A• AND ~.1FALJLA, AG. J .A.) 1 ' 1'! : 1 • CRIMD?AL APP~AL Iffl. 7-1~ OF 1989 \-~HE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROf3ECUTIONS •••• •••• •••••••••••~••• APPELLANT, ,i 1 VERSUS -l THADEI MLm.m & OTirERS • e 81 t O • i, • 0 O e • 0 0 • • ♦ o e • e 8 e (II ••• e f • e fl • • e R ~ SPO'J\fDE1'!.1. ,t (Appeal from the Order of the High Court" of Tanzania at Irine;a) (MWAIKASU ~ J.) ·1 dated 9th day of Nover,fber,, 19{j8 · in Misc. Criminal Cause No. ~ of 198~ t r I llYAL ',IJ.,_ .Q... J. : These proceedings are a consolidation of four criminal api)eals "by the.. Dire~tor of Public Prosecutions. The first case is cri1::1ina-l , ~ppeal No~ 7 of 1989 concerninc~ Tl1adei N.lomo and Charles s/ o Nyimbo • Michuzi Mwanzalila as the res:,?ondents 7 '.he second is criminal appe.al fl~, 8 of 1989 concerning Charles s/o Nyinf.Jo @ Michuzi Mwanzali.'.µ1 1 I ' I S-rnest s/ o Fabian Makofila @ Seif, Ben s I· o l:hilipo Sanea and Ti1adei \il,omo; tho third is crimin2.l a;,)-:al ~o e 9 of 1939 concerninc Krey j Z'ebedayo Mhelela @ Mawc.ni 9 2..;:1c.~ t~:c f01.;.rth and last one is criminal appeal No. 10 of 1989 conco:;:'_ainr; Charle~ NyL11bo fl} Michuzi tiwo.nzallla, '" \ ·-t Ben s/o Philip6 Sahga~ 'Thadci Ulorno and ~qsopl1 Kenneth Ngolc. Each , ·~ •t ~ ,, one of these cases ?rigin::itcc~ in the Di:3tr: ct Court of Irinr~a Distri.Ct.,__;:,_ -{i. '"' -ollill {': at Iringa where the) rosponc.10:;.1ts in tho firs~, second and fourth cases . ··: ·. ·.:{t. f-~ . :¥-. rf appeared and were c~1argcd r,it:: -c~1c offence -)f robbery with violence --~, In the tl1i:td t:J.SG, tho ros::;>-ondent_ \ '· Jtrey Zobcdayo lrrl1clc·:.:a @ mawani 2:J)Carcd and was charge-<i__.only vri th the '\ \ . ;. ~ \ I . ·• / / ,' ,.,., 1',· .. / 2 \yffcnce · / r 1 of unlawful possession of /ire-a1'f!l.A-aY.l.d~_8Jl'.D]Ju1Ji.ti..o_n.,,,--0/s /tl//ar~ 31\ of tho Arms- and Arnmuni· t ion · ;': Ord.;i::nanc.o as amcndod by t · t'.Lil.I°" · d. ie ~,hedule to the Ee.anomic and Or~nizcd Crime Control Ac~ .Ifo1t ] of 9e4~ _In every one of th8so casos each respon~cnt cono~' ~1J.0d plcado-d 7 lty to tho offence for w11~ch ho was chargod 0 Kany~&, SRlW, who • I resided over the procGoding~ in the District 0.01u-t,. <Y1+viously 1 n his capacity as a District Iiac;istrate by virtuo of ~he dcfini tion ~ \ ~ t tder the provisions of soc ti .:in 2 of tho Ma&i,strc:tcs' C-.ourt Act .~r 1984; was qf the view that t:~c circumstances under ~/lich these l' 1ffences were committed by the respondents, ~alled for Gem3ror \ ' 7ontonces than he wJ.s empowered to impose accordine to J,aw(I He yhel:'eforo dec.i,ded to commit co.ch ::>f tho respond.on ts to 1.he HiGh Cou.r·/; ~ol' sentencing under tho proviGions .of section 171 .oft~ Crim.Lna.l • iocodure A ct: 1985. When tho cnsos cc:::~c up before th~ I-Ii:_)1 Cou.r-l$ (Mwaikasu: J.). on the 9th foyc:obcr 19ssj' the learned ju\ge inquired &om the respondents in ca.cl!. c,::.sc: :::bauJ_; their pleas in tR-c lower ; i•'.'l't ;;·.. ) I\ : -~:. ·. t)ourt, and all tho respondents P '.vi tl: -tho :::xcoption of ThA.¢.ei s/ 0.. -....._ rl'·t~~ t • ~ /·"r , , · [·:,; · ¾lomo, in Criminal A:._::i1)oal No 11 7 of 1989 retracted their ~}cas fl Ir•;_,(• \ .· . . ·• ;:'.?<i f.J.aiming that they had been tortured by tl10 police into p~onding guilty- 'r',': ,. \ (eforo r tho Dist;ict Gou.rt. , ,_. · \he ~-r_. ;, said Thadoi s/o r~aomo t0 15 yco.--::s ic·,--.--::i.:::;.J1~1cnt u:.;ion· ~~nfirming ;-iJ ,his. plea of guilty. As to t:10 othe:r ros~J-Jl1.U.(.,;:1ts ._ the:: lca·~ncd judge .. ·;( ( , \) . apparently accepted their retracti8ns, and proccoded to s~bstituto ·:•;:~ ~loas of not guilty instco.d of t~10 plo~s of DUilty ontcre~ by the ·.t. . .t: . . ./' . \.., , 1:.i. DJ.strict Court, and ordered those. rcspoudcnts to bo braugh\ before ~l. ..i. n~ t. tihe District Gou.rt to stand trialo The Director of Public Pr,osccut.:..ons '\ . b. f '(']~_· . . . . . ~~f-·· y;_as aggriovod by this docision of tho High CJurtc .....,_., f .l- Honcc u _J.s ap~t1C8.i i A .... '-,,. ~'.~~~~lu\s C?ur't. Before us Nir. Tcomba, learned Princ:tpaJ~ st,atq Lttorncy 11 ~r·,\. ~ppoarcd jor the Director of Public Prosecutions, whoroas tho . \ . ~- "" '," ., ·' .1:_-~.__apon&cmts o.ppo2rod in person. Four ·.grounds. of appeal woro '). •• 1/ . " ill I ·: " j I I I f: I \ I 'i J f ~ ·- (.., 'rlu--- -. - ~ r- -_- IL · - 3 ' I • t'l \~bmittcd by the Director of Public Prosecutions in su.pp.ort. of the t _appeal but two of tho so _grotmds' that is, grounds three and four, w~.rEL_~-L ~doncd by Mr. Tcembc3, early in tho proceedings before us~- The· '' { .'first ·and second grounds which remained bofJro us aro to the cffo-rt .. n I \ ' . -:•il; I _. that tho High Court had no jurisdictLm to alter tho ploas of guilt;t ; -- ; 1 ma.~e by the respondents and to substi tutc pleas of noi guilty: .. \ ··J ;\' . f - . \ ' ·, ..., -1,: } "'·: lllr. Tcemba submitted that tho only task bcfaro thG j:ud$o was to . ' :f.: ; l sentence tho respondents as if they had been qonvictcd 9y i the High t1 \ \ :_,, · \:, :_ Court~ If the respondents hacl any griovnncos 6~nccrnin~ their :' - 'i ~-~~ ~. ~ convictions in tho District Court, tho only cour's? opcm \o, thorn is by way of appeal from tho District Court to tho ~~gh Goutj., against '._ \. \I \. :·-~, their convictions. t: . -~ ---._ Wo have closely examined the provisi.:ms of so~ti-::m l 7~of the } Criminal Procedure Act 1985 and we arc fully satish.ed that k~ .,.J \ ~ TBemba is correct. That section rends: ·\., ,· -~ -:.-~ "171-(1) Where under tho provisi'.ms of tl1is /wt ~ subord;i..ni:rte, cour.t, presided over by n · District Magistrate cdrivicts any .. "t,· ·tl adult of an offonco, than, if on obtaining information as \( t? the character and antecedents of such_adult ~s to the .t Of circumstances of tho offo:nce, ~ho court is of op~n103: that ._,. ,1 they are such that gr:.. ator punishi.-ncnt sl1::>uld be 1.ntlictod ,· ; for tho offence than tho CJurt has powor to inflici, tho · court may, instead of do2line; with him in any otho\:, mam1~, ). : ·r 1 comrni t tho offender in custody to tho High Court f 6.i;- s c n t c n N_ _· . l_· in accordance with the following provisions of section. . _. ~~, thi\ '(2l Whoro an offender is CJElii:li ttod to tho· High Oourt for son ton 0 under tho provi3i :ms of this socti Jn, tho HiGll Court · , 1-......_ shall nquire into tl10 circumstances of tho case and shall ·.·\: · deal with tho offender in any mannor in which ho could have t. bceri dealt with by tho High C.)urt if ho had boon C.)nvictod .. ,_., by the High Court of tho Jffoncc in qucsti-:m. -.-!'. \\ (_3) ~f. tho HiiSh ~ourt iD.:pJsos a sontonco qn the off~ndor, tho provisiJns of tl1.1s I.ct vn. tl"1 rog8rd to an a'ppcal ac;ains't C-Jnvi9~ion only shall o.:.0~!lY as f'.)r ;my other c ~ t.riccl by a suborclii.nato. court. 1~ • \ '\, '. \\ .,,' \ \.\ t 1,\ \ ', \ l \ \ '\. \ ••• /4 /' \\ ( \ ,(' ' \ ' ' '\ ·,, ., \ \ \~ \ \ ( I •, \ 4 - It is obvi-Jus from tho pr'JvisiJns of sub-sectL:m ( 2) of s.cction 171 that what tho High C,)urt is roquirod to d-J upon a colTiii1i t.al for sentencing, is_ to sentence tho offond<;:ir as if ho w3s convicted by l· .· tho High Court i tsclf • In S'.) doing the High Qourt is roauircd to .\ I ~ '{ ~quire into· the circumstances ~f the case with the view to determining_\:· I ,. he appropriate sentence. Thus the sc•JpEl• of such inquiry is limi tcd \-;,, ,., o sentencing, and docs not extend to tho propriety of :tho convictions •. ',_ cJnvicti'Jns can only be looked mto by way of an appeal to the ~gh G0urt as already pointed Jut, or by way of revision in an propriate case as provided under sub..;.s.oction (6) of section 171, nee there was nothing ap;x:r~:nt .Jn -tho rocJrd of the District ·.Court o require tho High C)urt to exorcise its pm,vcrs 'Jf rcvis~on, tho ... ction taken by Mwaikasu, J. wo.s clearly erroneous in law~· We l l re thus bound to_ interfere -.)i t:1 tho de cisi )i1. of tt,e High Court, , and \ · llow those appeals by the Direct-Jr of Public Prosa-f1.tions, ·and \'\ cstore tho 'pleas of guilty 2nd the (l;Onvicti'Jns mado thereon by \ District Court. ' 'i ' I Having taken this do cisi :m, we havo askocl 'Jurso~vos whether should remit those cases t;J the High C:::>u.rt f::>r sontoncing as o iginally intended by tho District CJurt, Jr whether, we sh::>uld .~ \ Sin co this court has the po 1HQr spose of tho matters :)ur3cl vcs. . \ I I y · do what tho High CJurt c.Yu.ld l1avo done, by virtue of' tho pro~si0ns \ so ct ion 4 cif tho !lppo llato Jurisdiction I.ct P 1979, 'a:po WC \ 1 '( : sai_~sfiod that tho il').terosts :if justice ror{uirc that . there Bµ'Juld . \ ;~ be i;l.o further delnys in dislJ:>sinr~ of those natters. We shal\ . ·, _tnc~ef-oro do what tho Hi.:,h CJt:.rt should hnvc c1Jno ~ \ ,\ :, .· · In detcrmininr; the o;,;_1r0;,rie1to sentences we have taken i n t ~ ~ ~ .. -~ accoUJ.1.t tho circurar>tcmcos Jf tho case. concorninG each respondent. ,, ,_, ••• /5 - '. ,. { :·'.~i I_ --. ',\} ., - 5 ; ' We have taken duo notice of the fao, that all tho respondents are ' first offenders~ We have also borne in mind tho fact that tho :· , respondents appear to have couni ttod those offences as members of '' \ . an organized criminal gang which was armed with several sub-maol1ino guns. This gang terrorised E1CijJbors of tho public by intorcopting motor vohicl~s, including public service vehicles, trawllinc; on public roads. Justice ro0uiros that action be taken to eliminate this gang by doprivi.lre tho respondents of tho opportunity to renew their activities, nnd thereby restore to tho public a sense of soturi ty in using public roc.c~s~ Taking into account tho mi ti32tion \ ' \ I\ I ' ~, made by tho rcsp.Jndonts bof,Jro us, nnd bcnrinc in mind tho fact thnt tho respondents committed tho offences of robbery with violence before the recent chcmc;os wore 1:10.clo in tho law by raising tho minimµ.m sontonco, we hereby pass the followins sentences: 1~ Charles s/o Nyimbo @ michuzi l\/Iwanzalila iro sentenced to a term of impris:mr;:iont similar t,') that passed upon Thadci s/o Mlomo that is 15 Jre~rs imprisonment in criminal appeal I ii No. 7 of 19e9 9 2. Charles s/o Nyimbo@ Niichuzi Mwanzalila and Ernest s/o ~ Fabian Mak0fila@ Seif and Bon s/o Philipa Sanga and \ Thadei s/o Wllono e.ro c,:rnh sontonccd to a_ term of 25 i years impris:mmont in criri1inal appoa.l No. 8 of 1989; \ '\ \ ·1I ' 3.· Charles s/o Nyinbo @ Michuzi Mvnnzalila and Ben s/o \ \ Philipa Sanga and Thcctoi ~Homa and J·Jsoph Kenneth Ng-Jle I \ \ '. arc each sentenced to.25 years ir.iprisonncnt in criminal ' nppoel No. 10 of 1989~ Those sentences in crir,1ino.l c.)::'lC2l No. 7 of 1989 and No,. 8 of 1989 as well 2s No. 10 of 1989 arc; t') run concurrently resulting in \ '·- a substc:nti vc term of 25 yc. .rs inprisonmcnt to bci''se-I:J[~~ 0 o.: tho respondents concc.rnod i:;.';. t~.'.)Se ·•Cotsos.. " , \ "'- \ \", "-, \ . 6 4. Krey Zdbcdayo Mhclols@WawG.ni is sontonocd to tho naximwn sontonco lJrJvidod by law for the offcnc~ of unlawful possession :Jf firo-arr,1s and ar1rnuni tion, that is, ton years imprisorn:-1011.t in Criminal 1.. ~J:-i,1oal No. 9 of .1.989 for ·which ho alone was charged and cJnvicted. We order acc)rdin.zly. DJ.TED at MBBY1\ this 1st cay Jf Juno, 1989; F. 18 l'TYl~Li".LI -·--- CHIEF JUSTICE L. Ne r.'L:KiJ','.lE JU3TIC3 OF_tP~ L. n .. r1F.2\LIL:1 AQ-~ __JUSTIC~'!; OF i1PP:Si'.L I certify that -this is a true '· .. _...