|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| January 2023 |
|
|
Pre-trial charges of ADF membership and aiding terrorism dismissed for lack of substantial grounds to believe the accused committed the offences.
Anti-Terrorism Act (ss.11, 8) – belonging to a listed terrorist organisation; aiding and abetting terrorism – evidentiary requirements; ICD pre-trial standard – application of Rome Statute/ICC "substantial grounds to believe" standard; admissibility/use of charge and caution statements recorded under different statutory provision.
|
22 January 2023 |
| December 2022 |
|
|
Whether serious, multiple charged offences and insufficient individual medical proof defeated exceptional-circumstances bail applications, balancing liberty and security.
Bail — Trial on Indictments Act s.15 — "Exceptional circumstances" (grave illness, advanced age) — proof standards; Bail Guidelines 2022 — fixed place of abode; substantial sureties; likelihood to abscond; seriousness of offences and public/security interest.
|
19 December 2022 |
| November 2022 |
|
|
ICD has jurisdiction over trafficking and defilement charges; Principal Judge’s transfer valid; objections dismissed.
* Constitutional law – High Court unlimited original jurisdiction (Article 139) – specialised divisions (ICD) retain competence; * Criminal jurisdiction – human trafficking and defilement fall within ICD Practice Directions paragraph 6; * Statutory interpretation – Section 18 (trafficking Act) does not oust constitutional jurisdiction; * Judicial administration – Principal Judge’s administrative power under Article 141 and Section 20 Judicature Act permits transfer of cases; * Fair trial – ICD pre-trial procedures do not inherently violate right to a speedy and fair trial.
|
22 November 2022 |
|
Pre‑trial confirmation applied ICC ‘substantial grounds’ test; multiple trafficking and brothel charges confirmed, many others dismissed.
• International Crimes Division (ICD) – pre‑trial confirmation – applicable standard: Rome Statute/ICC ‘substantial grounds to believe' (Art.61(7))
• Trafficking in Persons Act 2009 – aggravated trafficking in children – elements: act, means (not required where victim is child), purpose (sexual exploitation), participation and aggravating factor (childhood)
• Evidence – police statements, medical Form 3A reports and scene photos – proof of child status and sexual exploitation
• Penal Code Act – operating a brothel proven; prostitution charge dismissed for insufficient evidence
• Discharge/dismissal – several accused discharged for lack of evidence; confirmations committed to trial
|
15 November 2022 |
| October 2022 |
|
|
A pre-trial judge in the ICD may hear bail applications; Rule 54(1) is void to that extent.
International Crimes Division – Bail – Jurisdiction of pre-trial judge – Rule 54(1) ICD Rules – Article 23(6)(a) Constitution – Section 14 Trial on Indictments Act – Constitutional supremacy – Rule void to extent of inconsistency.
|
27 October 2022 |
|
Pre-trial confirmation applied the ICC ‘substantial grounds to believe’ standard; forgery/uttering confirmed, trafficking and attempt charges dismissed.
* Criminal procedure (ICD) – Pre-trial confirmation – Standard: substantial grounds to believe (Rome Statute/ICC standard) applied mutatis mutandis under ICD Rules. * Amendment of indictment – Late oral amendment at confirmation stage irregular and prejudicial; notice and justification required. * Trafficking – Elements include act, means (fraud/deception) and purpose (exploitation); absence of victim statements and proof of means/purpose defeats trafficking/attempt charges. * Forgery and uttering – Forensic examination and ministry confirmation can establish falsification and intent to defraud; sufficient for confirmation of forgery, tampering and uttering counts.
|
4 October 2022 |
|
Court allowed limited, redacted and delayed disclosure to protect witness safety while safeguarding fair-trial rights.
Criminal procedure – witness protection – Rule 22 ICD Rules – redacted, delayed and summary disclosure; balancing witness-safety and accused’s Article 28 fair-trial rights; objective risk and proportionality standard (ICC jurisprudence).
|
3 October 2022 |
| September 2022 |
|
|
Application to consolidate two criminal files dismissed; counts may be joined but persons cannot be joindered on these facts.
Criminal procedure – consolidation v joinder; Trial on Indictments Act ss.23–24 – joinder of counts and persons; consolidation alien to criminal law; misjoinder; Article 28 right to fair and speedy trial and double jeopardy; DPP discretion; inherent powers of the court.
|
28 September 2022 |
|
Ex parte pre-trial witness-protection applications can lawfully limit disclosure without violating fair trial rights.
* Criminal procedure – Pre-trial disclosure – Witness protection orders – Non-disclosure, delayed and redacted disclosure; * Rule 22(2) ICrimes Division Rules – mandatory ex parte procedure where disclosure may prejudice investigations; * Constitutional law – Article 28 fair trial rights – disclosure is prima facie required but not absolute; * Pre-trial judge’s discretion to balance disclosure against witness safety; * International standards – ICC Rules and domestic rule-making under Judicature Act.
|
26 September 2022 |
| May 2022 |
|
|
Court confirmed charges, finding substantial grounds to believe accused committed aggravated trafficking in a child and defilement.
* International Crimes Division — Pre‑Trial confirmation — standard of proof: substantial grounds to believe (ICC Article 61(7)) applied mutatis mutandis. * Trafficking in persons — aggravated trafficking in children — elements: act (recruitment/harbouring), means (not required for child), and purpose (sexual exploitation). * Defilement — elements: victim under 18, sexual act, participation by accused. * Age determination — parental testimony, medical reports, school records as evidence; inconsistent medical reports do not defeat parental evidence.
|
6 May 2022 |
|
Court applied the Rome Statute "substantial grounds to believe" standard and committed the accused for aggravated trafficking in children.
* International Crimes Division – confirmation of charges – applicable standard of proof – adoption of Rome Statute Article 61(7) "substantial grounds to believe".
* Criminal law – Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act – aggravated trafficking in children – elements: transportation/recruitment, victim is a child, means (deception/abuse of power/vulnerability), purpose sexual exploitation.
* Evidence – medical PF3 corroborating sexual intercourse; birth notification establishing age.
|
4 May 2022 |
| January 2020 |
|
|
Applicant charged with terrorism granted bail on stringent conditions after residence and sureties were satisfactorily proven.
Bail pending trial; Article 23(6)(a) Constitution; presumption of innocence (Article 28(3)(a)); Trial on Indictment Act s.14(1) and s.15(1); proof of fixed place of abode (LC1 letter and land title); sufficiency of sureties; gravity of terrorism charges not alone grounds to refuse bail.
|
8 January 2020 |
| December 2019 |
|
|
Prolonged remand without a trial date can justify bail for terrorism charges subject to strict verification and conditional terms.
Bail — Presumption of innocence — Prolonged pre-trial detention and absence of trial date as factors favouring bail — Serious/terrorism offences do not automatically bar bail — Sureties resident outside capital but within jurisdiction may be substantial — Court-ordered verification of residence and stringent bail conditions.
|
30 December 2019 |
| August 2018 |
|
|
|
30 August 2018 |
| April 2018 |
|
|
High Court granted bail on terrorism charges due to lack of prosecution evidence of flight risk or interference and presence of substantial sureties.
* Criminal procedure – Bail – Accused charged with terrorism triable only by the High Court – right to apply for bail under Article 23(6).
* Trial on Indictments Act – Section 15 – exceptional circumstances and proof of non-absconding – not always determinative if prosecution adduces no contrary evidence.
* Burden on prosecution to show specific risk of absconding, witness interference or danger to the public when opposing bail.
* Sureties – independence, traceability and capacity – elderly relatives may be disqualified for lack of independence.
* Constitutional rights – presumption of innocence and protection against pre-trial punishment; duty of security organs to respect court orders.
|
10 April 2018 |
| November 2017 |
|
|
|
22 November 2017 |
| August 2017 |
|
|
Criminal law
|
21 August 2017 |
| September 2016 |
|
|
|
23 September 2016 |
| May 2016 |
|
|
Court imposes life and long-term sentences for terrorism and murder, declines death penalty, grants community service for accessory after remand credit.
Terrorism sentencing — balancing gravity, premeditation and societal harm against mitigation — death penalty declined; life and long-term imprisonment imposed; pre-trial detention and statutory maxima may justify community service for accessory after the fact.
|
27 May 2016 |
|
Criminal law|Evidence Law|Admissibility
|
26 May 2016 |
| October 2014 |
|
|
Criminal law
|
16 October 2014 |
| March 2012 |
|
|
A convicted person is not eligible for statutory amnesty under Section 3(2)(a) of the Amnesty Act; suit dismissed.
* Constitutional and statutory interpretation – Amnesty Act Cap 294 – scope of Section 3(2)(a) – whether amnesty available to persons already convicted.
* Criminal law – treason convictions – interaction between post-conviction remedies and statutory amnesty.
* Administrative law – powers of the Amnesty Commission and DPP – certification for amnesty.
* Fundamental rights – Articles 20, 21, 42 – alleged discrimination and fair treatment under the Constitution.
|
6 March 2012 |
| November 2011 |
|
|
Court stayed trial pending Constitutional Court determination, noting prison officials erred in refusing to commission affidavits.
* Constitutional law – stay of criminal proceedings – principles: prima facie likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of convenience. * Criminal procedure – commissioning of affidavits by remand prisoners – prison officials may not refuse commissioning for disbelief in contents; Commissioners of Oaths only administer oath. * Jurisdiction – trial not under international crimes regime where events predated constitution of International Crimes Division; challenge to designation amenable to Constitutional Court review.
|
18 November 2011 |