Republic v. [Accused Persons] (Murder of Makau Muthoka)
The bottom line
#If the prosecution presents enough evidence to suggest a crime occurred, the accused must defend themselves, even if the proof is not absolute.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether a prima facie case was established at the close of the prosecution case
Yes - based on the post mortem report and evidence of PW6, the accused have a case to answer and were put on their defence.
The court reviewed the definition of a prima facie case from Bhatt, Kiura and Abdi Ibrahim, noting the standard is lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt. Although there was no direct evidence linking the accused to the death, one post mortem report suggested the fatal injuries could not have been caused by a fall, and the accused had chased the deceased before his apprehension. On the totality, the court could not find there was no case to answer.
The applicable test on a no-case-to-answer submission
The question is not whether the accused ought to be convicted but whether he could lawfully be convicted on the evidence as it stands (Galbraith test).
The court adopted May v. O'Sullivan and Republic v. Galbraith: where prosecution evidence taken at its highest could not support a conviction the case must be stopped, but where strength or weakness depends on witness reliability or matters within the fact-finder's province, the matter should proceed. The court also cited Prazad on dismissing charges where evidence is so lacking in weight and reliability that no reasonable tribunal could safely convict.
Legal principles established
#- A prima facie case is one on which a reasonable tribunal, properly directing its mind to the law and the evidence, could convict if no explanation is offered by the defence; a mere scintilla of evidence is not enough.
- An accused should not be put on his defence merely in the hope that his evidence will prop up an otherwise hopeless case.
- Where a submission of no case is rejected, the court should give no reasons beyond stating that it is rejected.
Court orders
#- 1.The accused persons are put on their defence
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original criminal jurisdiction over murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code; ruling under section 306(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v. [Accused Persons] (Murder of Makau Muthoka)", Case Analysis (2019). . Source:
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.