Download

Uganda Judgment

East African Court of Appeal

Rex v Anyoro (Cr. App, No. 194 of 1938.) [1938] EACA 140 (1 January 1938)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court held that the confession made by the appellant to the Chief was not automatically inadmissible under the Evidence Ordinance, Cap. 68, sec. 24. The court found sufficient corroboration of the children's testimony in the appellant's conduct of leading the Chief to the location of the hidden spear. The court concluded that, unless the law is further amended to specifically exclude confessions made to Chiefs, such confessions remain admissible. Accordingly, the conviction was upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.

02

Material facts

Parties

Rex

Respondent Counsel: Henderson, Crown Counsel (Tanganyika)

Okello Byenzi s/o Anyoro

Appellant

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant was absent and unrepresented; no arguments were advanced on his behalf.
Respondent
The Crown argued that the confession to the Chief was admissible and that there was sufficient corroboration of the children's evidence by the appellant's conduct in revealing the location of the spear.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Evidence Ordinance (Laws of Uganda), Cap. 68, sec. 24

    A confession made to a Chief is not ipso facto inadmissible in evidence.

  2. 02

    General principles of criminal evidence

    Corroboration of evidence from children of tender years may be established by conduct of the accused.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court held that the confession made by the appellant to the Chief was not automatically inadmissible under the Evidence Ordinance, Cap. 68, sec. 24. The court found sufficient corroboration of the children's testimony in the appellant's conduct of leading the Chief to the location of the hidden spear. The court concluded that, unless the law is further amended to specifically exclude confessions made to Chiefs, such confessions remain admissible. Accordingly, the conviction was upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Obiter and limits

  • If it is intended that confessions made to Chiefs should be excluded, then the law will require further amendment.
  • The intention of the Legislature regarding confessions to Chiefs is not clear from the current wording of the Evidence Ordinance.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

  • The appeal is dismissed.

Source and reliance status

East African Court of Appeal

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

East African Court of Appeal

Judgment

[1938] EACA 140

COURT OF APPEAL FOR EASTERN AFRICA

Before Sir Joseph SHERIDAN, C. J. (Kenya); WHITLEY, C. J. (Uganda); and BARTLEY, J. (Tanganyika)

REX, Respondent (Original Prosecutor) v.

OKELLO BYENZI s/o ANYORO, Appellant (Original Accused) Cr. App. No. 194 of 1938.

Appeal from conviction by H. M. High Court of Uganda.

Criminal Law-Evidence Ordinance (Laws of Uganda), Cap. 68, sec. 24—Confession to a Chief.

Accused appealed from a conviction of murder of a child. Theevidence included that of two children of tender years who said they had seen the appellant kill the deceasd with a spear. The Wan Pach (Chief) of Alegi gave evidence inter alia that the accused hadvoluntarily confessed to him that he had killed the child and that the appellant had shown him where the spear was to be found.

Held (8-11-38).—That the confession to the Chief was not ipso facto inadmissiblein evidence.

Appellant, absent, unrepresented.

Henderson. Crown Counsel (Tanganyika), for the Crown.

JUDGMENT (delivered by Sir Joseph Sheridan, C. J.).—We think that there is sufficient corroboration of the evidence of the children in the conduct of the appellant in taking the Chief to the spot where a spear was hidden in the grass and revealed by the appellant to the Chief. As to whether the confession made to the Chief is admissible whatever the intention of the Legislature may have been we are not prepared to say that a confession made to a Chief is inadmissible on a strict reading of the Evidence Ordinance (Laws of Uganda, Revised Edition), Cap. 68, sec.

24. If it is intended that confessions made to-Chiefs should be excluded then the law in our opinion will require to be further amended.

The appeal is dismissed.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Evidence Ordinance (Laws of Uganda), Cap. 68, sec. 24

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.