criminal procedure cases, Exercises of Criminal procedure

Download criminal procedure cases and more Exercises Criminal procedure in PDF only on Docsity! UGANDA MARTYRS UNIVERSITY NKOZI NAME: NYINOMUNTU ANNET REG.NO: 2019-B411-12400 COURSE UNIT: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE I LECTURER: MR. AMANYA TIMOTHY Uganda vs Mustapha Atama 1975 HCB 254 In this case, the accused a Kampala business man was charged in the chief magistrate’s court with obtaining money by false pretence contrary to section 9 of the PCA cap 106. The prosecution alleged that the accused while in the Republic of Zaire obtained shs 3360/- from the charge-d’ affaires of the Ugandan embassy by falsely pretending that he required the money for the maintenance of eight Ugandan soldiers who were stranded in Zaire while on an official mission. The question was whether Ugandan Courts had jurisdiction over the matter as the offence had been committed in the Republic of Zaire, though in Uganda’s own embassy. Held; Where as the state is competent to prosecute its own nationals for offences committed abroad on the basis of nationality, however exercise of jurisdiction on the basis of nationality is not automatic, but municipal courts must be enabled to do so by legislation. Uganda v Christopher Kiwanuka [1979] HCB 210. In this case the magistrate grade II tried the accused of an offence brought under the fire arms act, which was an offence stipulated under the first schedule to the MCA to which a magistrate grade II had no powers to try. It was held that the conviction of the accused and sentence imposed on him by the magistrate grade II in disregard of the provisions of the first schedule was illegal. Abdal Aziz Saleiman v R (1958) EA 31. The appellant in this case was charged with corruption. When the prosecution case was closed he pleaded guilty to the offense alleged and was convicted and sentenced to two years imprisonment with hard labour. His appeal to the Supreme Court against sentence was dismissed, where upon he appealed again on the ground that by virtue of S.12 of the Prevention of Corruption Ordinance, 1956, the prosecution required the written consent of the Attorney General or Solicitor General. The record itself did not indicate whether the sanction had been produced to the magistrate but no request to produce the sanction, which it was admitted existed, had been made on behalf of the appellant. The grounds of appeal were that the required sanction was not made part of the record, that in consequence the magistrate could not take judicial notice of it and might have been mistaken as to its sufficiency, and that in any event since the appellant had no chance to attack its validity he had been prejudiced. Court held that unless contested, a sanction to a prosecution proves itself and a magistrate is thereby entitled to act on it without oral evidence as to its authenticity. Musis v R (1969) EA 351 The accused posted forged invoices in Uganda as part of a false claim on the Kenya Government, his employer. He was convicted in Kenya on charges of uttering the invoices and of attempting to obtain money by false pretences. On appeal he argued that the Kenya court had no jurisdiction. R v Pinfold 1988 2WLR 635 Lord Lane CJ considered the feasibility of re-opening an appeal: ‘So there is nothing there on the face of it which says in terms that one appeal is all that an appellant is allowed. But, in the view of this court, one must read those provisions against the background of the fact that it is in the interests of the public in general that there should be a limit or a finality to legal proceedings, sometimes put in a Latin maxim, but that is what it means in English.