19890914 TZCA Dar es Salaam2

. C IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DftR ES SALAAM <.s2£~• lW\t1U11 ~.,a.,..!S.Uil1:!UI\J..,.'J.1ou .bm11.1lUUJ.L...UJA&.I C:ltl.MIN/\L ,\PIJE:AL NO. 132 Of' 1988 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. APPELLANT versus (" >. A 11-,I'l'EJl-:J. HJ1MI SI. • • • • • • • • • • • • • RESPONDENT I I. (l,ppeal from the Acquittal· of the High Court ;{·: .· of Tanzania a~ Lindf) ;, ---~--~ •, .:( C, (Kf15ime-te I J • ) dated the 30th day of August, 1988 f+ in . t'. . ~ Criminal Sessions Case No. 13 of 1986 · 1/' . ., JUDGMENT OF THE COURT ' 1 'i Lindi Region. The H;gh Ceurt which· tried hlm (Kaziml"to, J.) ~- was not satisfied that the charge had been pr•ved. Accerdingly the resp•nder.t · was acquitted. The Direcw~r of Public Prosecutions has appeal~d to this court ~nd he ~a_SJepresented befo~e--us by Mr. Mwariyik.a, .. learned Pd.pcipal State Attorney. Mr. Mnzava, learned Counsel from the Tanzania Legal Corporation, opposed the appeal- r.-ri behalf -.f · the respondent. The Republic's ce"lplaint was that th!=! resp•ndent should not have be;in acquitted: The evidenoe on record wa" sufficient to warrant a ~onviction for murder or at least, alternativ~ly, a special finding •f Guilty but InsclnE· under section 219 •f the Criminal Precedure• Act • • Mr. 1-tnzava submit.ted Pn thG! othnr h"M' ~Mb hh aU,Pnt w•• 11g11lly !nou~ at tho Jneb diJ I t:im1i, There was in our view clear evidence that the responde~t killed ... th9 d-2ceascd by slashing h~m with a •anga in br•ad daylight • .... /2. 2 Thcrp_.~~s no controvoroy about this and t~c loamed juclgo oo found.- 1 •• ,t •- Hav.ing '_donc oo, howcvcr 1 tho learned ju(l.g-c wont on to acqi t th0 respondent for. $!!o ran.son t:J.e.t. ho was unn.bli.l to ll,\Y w:1ot!1<.Jr or not tho respondent wn.s :-~ c.ipos mc~tis o. t tho :,10.te:do.l til:.10, so ho so.id ho wns civin6 him tho '"'lif' . bonof.it of doubt, a co11,coction W.'.\G nllogodly given. to hi,:: to drink, n.ncl thnt '.;20 respondent tH did-\o"u drink -~:10 concoction in DIJY' o·,ont, so tJ:o.t there tms no qu0stion .\'•~;•; ~, ,. . (__. f,.:. havil11J ii'lC:uccd insn.nity in the rcspond.cnt' s mind. It was a strange .,, of .. ' , mixture the roopcmdent wns OiJ.itl to !:..1.vo been given - tl10 Govorrocnt •.1 !-;:' • • ,,..q sooo unkl10,m o.lknloid. .'. k~~~i ~~. ·~ ..... •, '· We e.r.:i··satisficd on tho avidJcnoc ',Lat tho rospon cnt partook of ' ~ the concoctimr. U<i a.re unable to aerc.:i with Hr. Mwanyilm thnt the 1 rospondcmt did 11ot do so. Th0 tostir.1ony of PW.1 MOII/.IDID IL'JUGI MWJ1MBO · .... . . :\.-·~· ·, clcerly <·· ~,.jd '.;hat t!10 respondent drn.nk t:..0 s'ruff • We respectfully ' ( agroo with ·~.'io lor..n1,)c.l trial judt.·t1 1;.':o.t i'u we.a not ato.tod w!:.t1t offoot th,1 ~£\:!,ct 0011ot'Joi11.on l1rlJ,il d. lw.vp Pl\ •m11il ti qlnrlt llnv-111t'1,hot11f'1f-1 ho •huµ,lµ hrw·o 0011aido11 ocl ·~:.:.o 11 ooponllU11-t tu bubnviotu1 hcrbh b<Jturu nwl c1.L''Lo11 ·bt.ild1ig tho concoction. 'i'!:!.o eviJ.011cc was tb.1.t '.:e :~au b'<.Jcn behaving r,100·~ ctrangel.y earlier th.at ;.iomi.ng 3.l.ld t:lc prcviouG 11igl:t. IIo shut ou·~ ~1io wife n.nd c:.ild.rcn fro;a '"::o house an<.l rofuood to open tl.c clcor wll.011 asked by his ' ·" 1 bro'~cr to d.o so. Tl10 respondent r,w.,icl t:""1.t people would '"cl;:o a.way his ·".!,. \!. mat •. Ile oru:io ou·~ in b.is underpants; he said ho fol t lil~o wa.;.1Ung-to-dio 1 -----•:. ho talk0d to ~!ir.10olf, ho hacl a chiclwu slnuglltorod in th<.J cldn.d of the night, ancl a.to H; and !·:c wn.s go.-iorc.lly ·t:iroatoning people. 1.1.so there ~ io o.·)1istory o:f inso.ni ty in t!10 respomlcint 1 s fa.oily of oricn'uaticns Two of his siblincs had been nen'"ally derm)Gocl. /' ••••/3. ' .. Ji - . " ·-..:I~,_ ..... ._ -----i-------~-~ _· ..... - -·----~~- , . ... ..., ' :· '/ / . ~~· - -· .,. . ... ~· .,- 3 (_j ~re of t!.c '9"icw t'.1::-/.; tr,o foroi;7,.ltl;:; · r.:i.c cnoug!: to wnrr~r~ of finding t;1n.t t!J.c rospom'.c:1t W/;,,S i,1s,'.'.no 1 or o.t lo •.~st -~hc.t it we.a ::-ioro likely thn.n not-thn-t 1rc w.f!.s ins:u.1 e. 'l'l:;.i:X\i-1ow iG f;;.rt!.er Ctron-ghthoned by tllc .. rcsp/mdcnt• s u..-iusuc'.,l behaviour imcdic/~oly .:-.ftcr t~ng t!10 liquid. Ho . wa.s awec'..tina- profusely his eyes ~r;ocl out~ ~d ho cut hio o:wi,1 wife cevcrn.l ti::ies. Tl:o respoadent killed in the circu:1atm1.ccs, rcvicwocl and it. was in our view <'- cle,:,.r error to· acquit hin. 'l'::o correct finding a!1ould ho.Vo boon Gw;iHy B\t'~ Inan.110 in ncoorc1Mce wi"ch sootion 21-9 (2) of t!io Criraina.l Proo0i:'turo Ii.oil ... tli'lt hi. ldlla4 1iha rl1.m11r;i:1,11t lllth lw ~•u1.1fJt:1p u~' M.JJ i111,t:1,111~ ho fo not t1u:I.Hy of N1W1lu:r, '1 11111 :l.1Jn11 1101l IIitJ.". Oc1W"~ ju.1lw'W u!\Ullld ·blion h~ve in-.roked ',L0 provision of Scctior, .219 (3).:i.. At tho end of tli.c hcarinB' of thio c.ppocl t~::.c lcn.rne:d Sta'~c Attoraoy conceded ?.S r.1uch, • ,. ifo Mcorc..il1e;-ly reverse -~ho Mquitte.1 0.1--icl find ~:\O respondent (, ~t: ,- .. ~. ~uiHy But Insrurn. We therefore orclor t:!c'..t c. ccr"tifiod COP'J of procoedinaa ~-- ·t_ . be sulfui ttod to '~.'.:.a Hinfotor and tl.:c:~ ·tho respondent· sl1nll monnw11ile be c,i:" . I ':}· 1 ' ' kept in cus·~ocy o.s n Crininal, lunntic. .., J JUS'I'IC~ OF i.P?E.U. •, . , .,:i:,. ,· lt.ll, IHI :Jill/~ ~i"~!: JULJ',1,'ICJ.iy 01~ e'rl'i 1J,L'tL i~ .H .I.. ON.LR •. , . 'J , ~- < ,. , , .' j' '<•.• ~f>.,.,,. ,..,, :1 ,JlJ:../l'ICE 0::::1 t..PP:J:."..L t' ., I I•.:•~ • 't-,, I certify t!",~t tl.:is 1a c'.1. tru.,?_~?P".f of tho original.