joseph john makune vs the republic 1987 tzca 40 4 july 1987

joseph john makune vs the republic 1987 tzca 40 4 july 1987

The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the trial court misdirected itself by shifting the burden of proof to the accused and not properly considering the defence. The sentencing procedure was also invalid as it was not decided by the majority of the court as required by law.

Citation
joseph john makune vs the republic 1987 tzca 40 4 july 1987
Parties
Appellant: Joseph John Makune; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
4 July 1987
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence of the High Court (economic Crimes Case No. 2 of 1986)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside; order for immediate release of the appellant unless otherwise lawfully held.
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Retrospective Application of Law, Banking Offences, Sentencing Procedure
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Economic Crimes Burden of Proof Retrospective Application of Law Banking Offences Sentencing Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph John Makune

Appellant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence of the High Court (economic Crimes Case No. 2 of 1986)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the charge under the Economic and Organised Crime Control Act was valid given the timing of the alleged offence
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether the trial court misdirected itself on the burden of proof and consideration of the defence

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the trial court misdirected itself by shifting the burden of proof to the accused and not properly considering the defence. The sentencing procedure was also invalid as it was not decided by the majority of the court as required by law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence set aside; order for immediate release of the appellant unless otherwise lawfully held.

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Sentence set aside