Laibuni v Republic (Criminal Appeal 126 of 2018) [2025] KECA 2149 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal replaced a mandatory death sentence with 25 years' imprisonment, applying the Muruatetu ruling that murder sentencing must consider mitigation.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the death sentence imposed on the appellant should be reviewed in light of Francis Karioko Muruatetu, the appellant having abandoned the appeal against conviction
Key legal issues
#Whether the mandatory death sentence imposed before Muruatetu could be revisited on appeal against sentence
Yes. Since Muruatetu, sentencing for murder is discretionary and mitigating factors must be considered; the death sentence is only a maximum punishment.
The appellant was sentenced in February 2016 when the death sentence was the only sentence for murder under section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. The Supreme Court in Muruatetu declared the mandatory nature of that sentence unconstitutional, holding that courts must exercise sentencing discretion and consider mitigation. Muruatetu 2 clarified the decision applies to murder cases. The appellant, a first offender who was 20 at the time, had served 14 years, reformed and become a prison preacher. The court found he deserved another chance but a custodial term was appropriate given the heinous nature of the killing of his brother.
What sentence should replace the death sentence
A custodial sentence of 25 years' imprisonment, running from the date the appellant first appeared for plea on 20th November, 2011.
The court weighed the appellant's youth at the time of the offence, intoxication, remorse, 14 years in custody, religious study and role as a prison preacher against the gravity of repeatedly stabbing a fleeing brother, causing massive haemorrhage and death. It concluded that although the appellant deserved a second chance, the crime was heinous, warranting a substantial custodial term rather than release.
Legal principles established
#- Following Muruatetu, courts dealing with murder charges have discretion in sentencing and must consider mitigating factors; the death sentence is now a maximum, not mandatory, punishment.
- Muruatetu applies only to murder cases, as clarified in Muruatetu 2.
Court orders
#- 1.Sentence of death set aside and substituted with a sentence of 25 years' imprisonment with effect from the date the appellant was presented to the trial court for plea (20th November, 2011)
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate / appellate review of sentence under the Court of Appeal's appellate jurisdiction (specific provision not stated in judgment)
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
We set aside the sentence of death imposed on the appellant and substitute thereof a sentence of 25 years' imprisonment with efiect from the date that the appellant was presented to the trial court for plea (20th November, 2011).
The jurisprudence has therefore emerged and courts have discretion to consider the particular circumstances and mitigating factors in sentencing
We agree that the appellant deserves another chance in the circumstances but we do not lose sight of the fact that he committed a heinous crime that led to the death of his brother.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment cites Muruatetu 2 as "Francis Karioko Muruatetu & Another vs. Republic & Others [2015] eKLR [2021] KESC 31 (KLR) (6 July 2021)" - the [2015] eKLR citation is internally inconsistent with the 2021 date of the Directions.
The judgment does not state the case number of this appeal or the trial court's case number.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Laibuni v Republic (Criminal Appeal 126 of 2018) [2025] KECA 2149 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Criminal Appeal (not stated in excerpt). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2025/2149/eng@2025-11-28
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.