|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2021 |
|
|
Appellate court acquitted appellant where unlawful audit and unauthenticated electronic evidence failed to prove guilt.
* Criminal appeal – first appeal – re-evaluation of evidence and duty to form independent view. * Admissibility of expert/audit evidence – practicing certificate requirement under Accountants Act 2013; illegality of unlicensed audit. * Electronic evidence – authentication, chain of custody and Electronic Transactions Act 2011 safeguards. * Circumstantial evidence – adequacy where passwords and system access are shared and attribution is unclear.
|
30 November 2021 |
|
|
30 November 2021 |
| October 2021 |
|
|
Convictions for giving false certificates and abuse of office upheld; causing financial loss convictions overturned for lack of proof of public monetary loss.
Anti‑corruption — giving false certificate — completion certificates signed by public officer — mens rea inferred from signing; Evidence — confession and section 23 Evidence Act — plain statement wrongly admitted without charge and caution; Evidence Act section 30 — absent witness statement improperly admitted without proof of attempts to procure attendance; Abuse of office — arbitrary act by public officer in certifying unperformed works; Causing financial loss — prosecution must prove public money and pecuniary loss to employer; Fair trial — omission to invite no‑case/final submissions not fatal absent prejudice.
|
22 October 2021 |
|
A public official convicted for soliciting and receiving gratification to clear allegations; fined, jailed in default, and barred from office.
* Anti‑Corruption Act – elements of corruption by a public official – solicitation and receipt of gratification in exchange for performing public functions.
* Criminal procedure – trial in absentia where accused absconds and has waived right to be heard.
* Evidence – use of audio recordings, mobile phone forensic imaging and CCTV to corroborate testimony.
|
8 October 2021 |
|
Court convicted a minister for soliciting and receiving gratification to clear allegations, fined and barred from public office for 10 years.
Anti‑Corruption Act – public official – solicitation and receipt of gratification – evidence: audio recordings, forensic phone analysis, CCTV – trial in absence after accused absconds – conviction and sentencing, including 10‑year public‑office disqualification and forfeiture of bail.
|
8 October 2021 |
|
Court convicts principal accountant and systems analyst for forgery, causing financial loss and conspiracy over misappropriated PRDP donor funds.
* Criminal law – Abuse of office, forgery, causing financial loss and criminal conspiracy involving public funds; admissibility of confession and computer forensic evidence; reliance on handwriting expert and circumstantial proof to establish forgery and loss.
|
8 October 2021 |
| September 2021 |
|
|
|
8 September 2021 |
| August 2021 |
|
|
Appellate court set aside acquittal and entered conviction, finding prosecution proved embezzlement and the accused had access to the drugs.
* Criminal law – Embezzlement – proof beyond reasonable doubt – recovery of stolen drugs, batch identification and stock reconciliation as evidence of theft.
* Appellate review – reappraisal of evidence – distinction between minor and grave inconsistencies; minor contradictions immaterial to central issue.
* Credibility and demeanour – trial court's reliance on undocumented observations and speculation impermissible.
* Opportunity – access to store and keys by virtue of office relevant to establishing means/opportunity.
|
26 August 2021 |
|
Whether a deputy registrar abused office by irregularly procuring vendors for a university graduation, violating PPDA procedures.
* Abuse of office – procurement outside PPDA procedures – issuance of allocation/award letters as procurement – arbitrary acts under Section 11(1) ACA – mens rea – prejudice to public employer – Contracts/Procurement and Disposal Unit/Contracts Committee mandate.
|
25 August 2021 |
|
Failure to post cashbook or missing requisitions alone do not prove embezzlement without evidence of fraud or loss.
* Criminal law – Embezzlement – requirement of fraudulent intent; failure to post cash book or missing requisitions alone do not prove theft.
* Evidentiary proof – value-for-money audit or supplier testimony needed to impugn accountabilities and establish financial loss.
* Admissibility – reliance on defence exhibit containing requisitions, vouchers and accountability receipts upheld where no evidence of fabrication.
* Appeal – appellate review may affirm acquittal where prosecution evidence does not establish essential elements of the offence.
|
17 August 2021 |
|
Accused convicted for obtaining money by false pretence, conspiracy and uttering false documents; money laundering charge dismissed.
Criminal law – Obtaining property by false pretence – Proof by documentary vouchers and false export documentation; Conspiracy to defraud – inference from coordinated acts and roles; Uttering false documents – false permits, certificate of origin, lab report and airway bill; Money laundering – requires evidence of active steps to legitimise proceeds; Failure to prove charges results in dismissal to avoid double jeopardy.
|
16 August 2021 |
| February 2021 |
|
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for an out‑of‑time appeal; application dismissed.
Anti-corruption Division – application for leave to appeal out of time – sufficiency of cause – explanation of right to appeal and time limits – absence/abandonment of counsel – jurisdictional complaint regarding triability of forgery – inordinate delay.
|
26 February 2021 |
|
A criminal trial will not be declared a nullity absent cogent proof of torture violating non-derogable rights of the accused.
Criminal procedure – Application to halt trial – Allegations of torture and violation of non-derogable rights – Standard of proof for claims of torture under the Human Rights (Enforcement) Act – Malice and abuse of office by investigators – No sufficient evidence of torture adduced – Trial not declared a nullity.
|
10 February 2021 |
|
Alleged torture not proven; trial not nullified under section 11(2) of the Human Rights (Enforcement) Act.
* Human rights enforcement – Torture allegations – burden of proof; non-derogable rights under Constitution and s11(2) Human Rights (Enforcement) Act, 2019; admissibility and probative value of audio forensic evidence; criminal procedure – nullity of trial; investigator misconduct and DPP supervision.
|
10 February 2021 |
| January 2021 |
|
|
Appellant’s convictions for filing false VAT returns upheld; tax-remission order set aside as illegal.
Criminal law - Tax Procedures Code Act s.58(1)(a) - False or misleading statements to a tax officer; evidential burden under s.26; admissibility of search evidence under s.41; accomplice evidence; illegality of judicial remission of tax and limits of vicarious liability findings in criminal matters.
|
22 January 2021 |
|
The conviction for interfering with customs goods was upheld, but the sentence was altered for illegality and remand credit.
* Criminal law – Customs offences – Interfering with goods under customs control (s.203(f) EAC Customs Management Act) – Elements and proof beyond reasonable doubt. * Right to fair trial – Choice of counsel – Court's discretion to refuse adjournment where counsel repeatedly absent; balance with speedy trial. * Evidence – Admission of documents during cross-examination (s.136(2) Evidence Act) to impeach credibility. * Doctrine of common intention – liability of agent acting with consignee. * Sentencing – Illegality in imposing both imprisonment and fine where statute permits either; credit for remand time.
|
22 January 2021 |