19900616 TZCA Mwanza2

' . AT r:r.-r.rnzA c:;:rn:TITAL APl?E.AL HO a · 20 OP i 990 l:...JDr:J...L.:l!I "CL.Z,.il-!I):TI Jt.;1I.i',. i'l'..CT:li--P.'i. :::.::.:c:sr m ..rnI..:i n::J{G.\PI s.·...rnn @ s.:~ID S/:JISO~T J:rTILI?:C1"fG~~.::. I· .. v e r s u s TEE IGPTDLIC. ,, • • o TISPOl:TDNJT (Appeal from the oom·iction of the :1igh / Court of Tanza-ni,> at ~-;)01·c:.) / "'·· / (Kor,osso_,__,:r.•) I I dated the 10t}1 de>,~" of JtLly~ 1989 in C~dminal Sessions c~'..O~£?... lTo.,.:.. 31 of 1081 N1JCJJE J. ,;.1.,, : --- . 2 . 'The deceased j_n the case giving 1°i:3c to this appeal, ENOCK DlFYONZ..".1. ]i'~S:,:8tTJU, was alle[;"Bcl. to ;Jo a, train robber and the contention by the Republic wr,s t::>.2.t he wc1,s assaulted to death by the appellants who intended that he should die 01· suffer grievous h2,1~m. During the so.De sessfon bf assault, the RopulJlic cont0nded 1 a_ Prosecution uitnoss and alleged had l)oth his c22s c'.lO]l)ed off with a l;:11ife 1)y one of t .. e appellants., ::Joth GontlcE1on .:tssessors u>o m:,t wi t;.1 t}ie cuil t}· of nru.rder,, Tho 108,rnod trir,1 judcc (Koresso, J ~) a:?,TOod with the assessm:-s, convicted tho D,}.)yella:..1ts for . 2 Mtu"d.or, and acco1·di.Y1gly oondonmecl thor:1 to d.02,tho They have J';Jx., Ru.:,oarabe,nm came 02'1:iod uitlJ. fotD: grounds of appeal seeking to domolisl1 tho triaJ. cou:r..-tt s devision -but before ho oould make· uso of l1is forensic arsenal ,ro d.row his o..ttontion to o, 1-,ossiblo issue ho 1:1ieht wish to 2-dc'..:-:'css us on, and it uo,s this: Whether, 1f tho assessors '.-re:;:,o not J'ivon tho opporti.:mit;;- to put questions to tho wi tnossos 1 ~he t:dt~l could i)O· s2,id. to lw,vo boon with the aid of assessors, Mel 1-rhc1.t tho effect wotiJ.d. 'Jo, in lo.w, if tho so,ia. fa•ial uas not uith tl20 eid of r.ssossors: Uc hncl_ to st.~d d01m t 120 2.ypoal for n brief 1-rhil•") so ns to 3'i vo time to coimsol to o:;_•gc.nfoc himself and ]_)).:C~,o,:::-o l1is roS])onso., On resumption i.Iro :S\igc.,rabo,nn,1 su1n;1ittod that hoc2~uso unclor Section 265 of tho Crimincl Procodu!'O !:.ct 11Lll trials bofo1·c tho II:i.c~1 Col..C't · slmll 1Jo with tho aid of assosno::s f,I n? ' O (I .-rho:::-o such a ti·ial is not with tho [',id of .:i.,ssossors it is n nulJ.ityo Ho also drew om· attention to Section 177 of tho Evidence Act tindo:r uhioh urn cases tried ui th o..sscsoo::-s tho assessor~ roy put any questions to t!.1.0 uiti1oss, t!IT01,1.gh or by loc,vo of tho j1,1.Cl50 ,. w:1icll t~19 judg-o himself might ::.,u.t o,nd uhich be conzid.crs pr;opo1•., 11 " Mr. Rugm•2,bamu else su1Jmittod tl:..1,t it is disoornilJlo born tho record of trioJ. that the: 2,ssocsors woro not invi tod d ~oO o/3 • 3 to :9ut questions to id tnossos foJ.'s hc.,d t:10J~ lJ0011~ and they- merely declined to 2,0ccpt tho invifa,tion ·)oc0-uso they did l'1ot ho..ve e..n;y- questions to ask, or if they l1o.d indic2.ted to tl10 t:;:-eial judge tho,t they uishcd to put po.rticul2.t' questiona o,lJ. of 1·rl1ich th.:- t:-:ioJ. · j1.1.dc;o did not conoic.01· propci·, the reco:;:od 1-101..1.ld luvo · se-id o,::mothin,3' ljj-;:o tllat tho questions wo1•0 'Nit1 o Lcm.."llod counsel also c,,d.drooccd us on Section 290 of tho Criraino.l Pl·ocodm?o Act 1r:.1ic!.1 :p:::-ovi~ess · "Tho 1-;i tnosscG called fo}:- tho J?:;_:oGocntion shall 1Jo subject to cross-c.::::c-,r.1il1dion by tho accusocl pe1:s011 or ;.1is ti,dvocc,te, and to re-ox2.nino..tion ·lJ;r tho mvoc;:,,to for tho prosecuti6no it If iTC CO!".i:ectl~r unclo~~•stood Mre nur.-;r-:..·2.b0,1-.rt11 c..s we j:Cckon uo did, ho wondered uhy assessoi·s uoi·e not J:-of'oi•:·od to in Section 290 like they Wero mentioned in Section 2650 lTo1-r .Section 290 dec,ls with ui tnessos fo1• tho co..so fo}: t~w J?rosocutiono We note th-:-..t it has its Countcrpo..:rt-Scction 294~ ,rhcn one comes to tho· Cnoo for tho Defonce., We do not houovor ~_)::..:OJ_)oso to dcto.in us too long with considc1·iY16 any of the r,1Jovo two sccti~ns bccc-u.so, for ow.• p:rescnt discussion, they ro·o cor.rylotely irro1ovcnt (> They doel with cross-oxamination c.nd i·o-oxo..mination of witnesses o.ncl tho accused, 110110 of which is tho f1.mction of o..ssossors,1 It is not tho cluty of o.,ssessors to cross-cxc.r.,inc 01• ro-e;w,mfoc l witnossos or the 2.ccusodo Tl1e 2,sccosoi•o 1 dv.t3r iG to c.icl tl1e trial judge in a.ccordance with Section 265, anc1 to do this t:.:cy may 1mt their quostioYlS 2.s proviclecl for uncler Section 177 of opinions under Section 298 of tho Crir.1:L1o.J. Proccdm·c ..::.ct 0 Ho micht mention here t:.1at 1 in p1•0..cticc, u:?.en t:.1oy put t;.10tr:- 0 a o/4 CO ., .. ... 4 questions vnc~or S?ction 177 of t!10 Eviclcnco Ji.ct 1967 other t::,"',Yl boinc; implicit in t:.:c juclgo not oio~):)inc thorn from pv.tting jtutao to p.i:ovont tho c,sking of q_uos~:i.ono uhic.h aro 1 for c,~mplo patently ilTolovo.1:1t~ bio..socl, po:rvorso, or othoruioo With tl10 hi:.1clsicsht c.dvr:..nt,'.J€() of oc.J.•lior o:ahangos in c.lic: not soolc to chclJ.on~c rfr .. Rur;2,'.':,,:X:',r,1n' s submission t!.-u:,,t tho tricl judge's fc'.1.ilt."!_:-.:c to comgly uith Soction 265 of tho C1•:L-:-iinal P~ocodUJ'.'O Act made tl10 tl•fo,J. not u;!.th xi.o o.ic.1 of assOSSOJ:§_ 2.l1cl so i•onc.lorccl it a nullityo Wo J.k-rvo 11....1,c~ oocc,sfon +o :pronou11co our viewo on the IJ1.1.ttc;;.• cloo whore clud.115 t7.::.o::;o current ScoGionsQ quost~ons, a,s we m~c s2.tisf:i.cd. 1re,s tho cc.so in tho p:i:-ooocc1:i.ngs I 1,olou, means tl.1d the a,ssoscors 1'T<Xi.'C o~olucl_ocl from fully pm•ticipat~ in tho tl•io,ls;; oo to the o.:;r.tont tl1<--it they uoro so cxcluc'locl, ancl cloniocl theii• sto..tut or3" :dght, tb.cy wsiro disc.bl eel from offoctivcl~r aiding the trfol juu.3c 1-ho coulcl onl:r :Jcncf:i.t fully if ho took into j1,.tlicious o,ccormt o.11 the views of his n.ssoaso1•s ancl t).1oso would onl3, or.10:tco from tho ir o-wn ,\ 1Co n:m:,roo:i.at ion of the: oo,so O,,S c., 'I-T.i:1.0 S'noh 0,pprcci2..t:i.on 1-roulcl . !.la t O t ,.lCJ.r n 0 Od t O ar t 1OU 1 • 01•m q_uos .J.. , • ' u1O118 l-U.7.O.l .., t', 0,., O ·s,.. ·.c . "r11ll1° ,:,'-'-~n .:_QJ..r as thoy go along, 2.11c~ 1J;y tl1oir ~olclinc; ,orcoption of t~10 faetual issues :i.nvolvocl, as ~~Istocl_ by t~:..c c.ssosoors' cxc::ic.,.--i0 es 5 1-rith t)10 ui tnossos. o.ncl tho D,ccuoo('..~ ;fo t;:d.::ik tJ:.e.t t:.w c,000000]:>s 1 ~ :cnll . 1 vomon t e,s OJ;._91 0,111cc. J.11vo. . " c,,:,ovo 1 ~ .,.o .... ,,._., n t1· '~1 ""1 ,..,,..,..,0 ,., n•,t of .i.,,c· -" pc:.:. 1,~~, nullity 0 Uc wish to e,cl.c1. e121ct:.10:r.· tl1ouj.:.t to this c::,::-_po::iitiong FoI' om· purpooo in t~:.c Court of !~pi,oc,l, t;10 :infor □o('. and. full viowo of tho c1,sscsso):>S l)ccomo f1..1:dhor 11ccossn.17 1r!1.on wo ~c.e,vo 4;o J:'Oly on who..t WO Ji1:icht co..11 tho SDCESJJL:'.. :9:•i..·wiplCj thd ia in t!.10 ovont of tho tri::..1 juc1[;'0 dioagJ:>coinc; ,Ti tJ.:: t]10 lm,w.1i1:1ous vious of to clo so.- In m:>dc:;_• to on::,1Jlc us to mc:l::o t:.1;:-,,t d.otcrr.1:iJ.1.:--,tion ancl to app:i:OOi['..tc-t~,oso }~oasons we um::J..c'. :1.~',YC to c:,-nugo tl:.on 2, 0 ,-::,inst the full encl informo·~ iticus of t:,.o c.,3sosoo1·s 1-r::.ich ~ o..s oxplrdnoc1.. TJ.1.is nooc1 for a jv..c\::;o to t:ti vo J:.is ro2,so11s for clis2.grocing 1-ri th t~10 unanir:1ous views of :1.is n.ssossors of it~ For ro2,sons uo lmvo onc:.oavoUI'ocl to CXJ:)la:iJ.1 t:10 lligl1 Cotu•t prooo:::clinc;s in tho CG.so giv:i.J.15 :dsc to t).1is ci,:;1po::J. r.ro tho o.p:pollants., _,__________ c:~"11'.';!i' J1JSTI'JE 1., rt, lL':1(..'J1E