Heshima Bebewa v Republic
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal ruled that skipping a mandatory step before putting an accused on his defence made the entire murder trial illegal, though a retrial was ordered.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Compliance with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code
The trial judge's failure to make a finding under section 306 and to inform the appellant of his rights of defence made the whole trial an illegality.
The record showed the judge neither made a finding of not guilty nor informed the appellant, personally or through counsel, of his right to address the court, give evidence, make an unsworn statement or call witnesses. Since the appellant was legally represented, his advocate ought to have been asked whether witnesses as to fact would be called, and the judge was obliged to record all of this. None of it was done before the ruling of 10th July 1998.
Retrial discretion
A retrial was appropriate despite the illegality, given the interests of justice and the facts of the case.
The court applied the established principles from M'Kanake, Fatehali Manji and Wilson Washington Otieno: retrial is ordered only where the original trial was illegal or defective, considering elapsed time and the interests of justice. The offence was committed in 1989 and trial only occurred in 1998, partly due to the appellant's mental state. The retrial was not sought to fill evidential gaps or rectify prosecution faults, so the discretion was properly exercised in favour of a new trial.
Assessors' opinions
The court noted as a defect that the assessors, though part of the trial, were never asked to give their opinions.
Although assessors participated in the trial, the record shows they were not asked to state their opinions on the evidence or the special finding. The court recorded this as an additional irregularity in the trial process, contributing to its conclusion that the trial was defective and that a fresh trial before another judge was required.
Legal principles established
#- A trial judge who finds the accused has a case to answer must comply with section 306 of the Criminal Procedure Code by making a finding and informing the accused of his right to address the court, give evidence, make an unsworn statement and call witnesses; failure to do so is a serious omission rendering the trial illegal.
- A retrial will generally be ordered only where the original trial was illegal or defective, and each case depends on its own facts and circumstances, taking into account the length of time elapsed since the offence and the interests of justice.
Court orders
#- 1.Appeal allowed
- 2.Superior court's special finding set aside
- 3.Appellant to be re-tried on the same charge before another judge
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Mombasa
- H.C.CR.C. No. 16 of 1995
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate criminal appeal to the Court of Appeal under the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Code against a special finding of guilty but insane under the Criminal Procedure Code
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Heshima Bebewa v Republic", Case Analysis (1999). Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 1998. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/1999/197/eng@1999-07-20
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.