Juris

 Where it is found an accused is being arrested with the perishable government trophy and the instance for the case to take a long time for it to end which in any how the government they could be perishable thus it it is required for them to be disposed in the presence of the accused and thus the inventory form should be filled the details concerning the details of the disposed government trophy and the said inventory will be used as an exhibit representing the disposed government trophy. Nyamhanga Mwise Muhere V. Republic. 

GIVING THE ROOM TO JOIN ANOTHER PERSON WHO IS NOT A PARTY TO A SUIT The policy behind this rule is that the defendant who has got a claim against a third party need not to be driven to a fresh suit against the third party to the indemnity  in his favor into operation or to establish his entitlement to contribution from the third party. the claim and the rights inter-se the defendant and the third party have to be decided in the third party proceedings.   see  the Case :- SUNLON GENERAL ENTERPRISES & BUILDING CONTRACTORS v. HOSEIN DHAWABU

                            THE PROSECUTOR v. JEAN-PAUL AKAYESU Case No. ICTR-96-4-T JUDGEMENT [...] 1.     INTRODUCTION [...] 6. [...] “The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, pursuant to his authority under Article 17 of the Statute of the Tribunal, charges: JEAN PAUL AKAYESU with GENOCIDE, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY and VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE 3 COMMON TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS, as set forth below: [...] The Accused Jean Paul AKAYESU, born in 1953 in Murehe sector, Taba commune, served as  bourgmestre  of that commune from April 1993 until June 1994. Prior to his appointment as  bourgmestre , he was a teacher and school inspector in Taba. As  bourgmestre , Jean Paul AKAYESU was charged with the performance of executive functions and the maintenance of public order within his commune, subject to the authority of the prefect. He had exclusive control over t...

  Attorney General v Jeremy Mtobesya (Mtobesya case) few weeks ago held that section 148(4) was ‘unconstitutional’ as well as ‘null and void’ on account of its derogation from the provisions of Article 13(6)(a) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. In the Mtobesya case, the Court made a remark that the Economic and Organised Crime Control Act ‘contains a provision akin to section 148(4) of the CPA through which the DPP is similarly empowered to issue a certificate denying bail to an accused person upon grounds that safety or interests of the United Republic are likely to be prejudiced by granting bail.’ Despite the decision in the Mtobesya case, the Court of Appeal in this latest decision, has effectively ruled the opposite in that since the bail application was heard on its merits and only then was bail denied, the Appellant cannot now argue that he was not given a chance to be heard and such allegations were baseless and unfounded. In trying to distinguish Mtobe...

Facts The accused was charged with murder contrary to section 196 of the Penal Code was alleged that she shot her husband in their bedroom. The main line of defence was that the deceased committed suicide. The prosecution called 15 witnesses including a ballistic expert. The prosecution case was mainly based on circumstantial evidence. Held : (i) The accused can only be convicted of an offense on the basis of the strength ofthe prosecution case and not on the basis of the weakness of the defense. (ii) When an accused is charged with an offence his or her guilt is not established or proved if the explanation he or she offers is one which is reasonable and might possibly be true even if the Court is not convinced that it is in fact true. (iii) To ground a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the following principles apply; (a) that evidence must be incapable of more than one interpretation (b) the facts from which an inference of guilt or adverse to the accused is sought to be drawn, m...

 Trust Bank Ltd V. Le – Marsh Enterprises Ltd, Joseph Mbui Magari, and Lawrence Macharia .  In this case, the court ruled that the electronic evidence is admissible in Tanzanian Courts and the same was a departure from the strict rule of best evidence that only primary evidence i.e. original documents are admissible. He further notes that, judges are not to be ignorant of modern n business methods and stay aloof to the mysteries of the computer.  This decision, in his opinion shows the judicial activism and the role of judiciary in filling gaps left by the legislature. The legislature following this decision responded by enacting Electronic Evidence Amendments Act, 2007 which provides for provision for the reception of electronic evidence in courts of law in Tanzania.  The new section added is section 40A, to the Tanzania Evidence Act, 1967 . Inter alia, the section provides that in any criminal proceedings information retrieved from computer systems, networks or sev...