Download

Uganda Judgment

East African Court of Appeal

Rex v Nyakililo (Cr. App. No. 89 of 1938.) [1938] EACA 116 (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 substantial compliance with the certification requirements under section 217(4) of the Uganda Criminal Procedure Code is sufficient for admissibility of an accused's statement from a preliminary inquiry. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that statements favourable to the defence should not be excluded solely because of technical defects in certification. Although the issue was not material to the outcome of this particular appeal, the Court clarified the guiding principles for future cases regarding the admissibility of such statements. The appeal was dismissed on the basis that there was ample evidence supporting the conviction, and the certification issue did not affect the result.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal is dismissed.

02

Material facts

Parties

Rex

Respondent Counsel: Dennison, Crown Counsel (Kenya)

Nyakililo

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 regarding the certification of his statement.
Respondent
The Crown submitted that the certificate substantially complied with section 217(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code and that the statement could be admitted if favourable to the defence, even if certification was imperfect.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Uganda Criminal Procedure Code, section 217(4)

    A statement may be admitted if the certificate substantially complies with section 217(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

  2. 02

    Court of Appeal for Eastern Africa precedent

    Statements containing something favourable to the defence should not be excluded due to imperfect certification.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court held that substantial compliance with the certification requirements under section 217(4) of the Uganda Criminal Procedure Code is sufficient for admissibility of an accused's statement from a preliminary inquiry. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that statements favourable to the defence should not be excluded solely because of technical defects in certification. Although the issue was not material to the outcome of this particular appeal, the Court clarified the guiding principles for future cases regarding the admissibility of such statements. The appeal was dismissed on the basis that there was ample evidence supporting the conviction, and the certification issue did not affect the result.

Obiter and limits

  • The Court expressed its general opinion on the admissibility of certified statements, even though the issue was not material to the determination of the appeal.
  • The judgment reiterates that technical defects in certification should not prejudice the accused if the statement is favourable to the defence.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

  • 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 116

COURT OF APPEAL FOR EASTERN AFRICA

Before Sir JOSEPH SHERIDAN, C. J. (Kenya); KNIGHT-BRUCE, Ag. C. J. (Tanganyika); and HAYDEN, J. (Kenya)

REX, Respondent (Original Prosecutor)

NYAKILILO, Appellant (Original Accused)

Cr. App. No. 89 of 1938.

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

Evidence—Criminal Procedure Code (Uganda), section 217 (4)—

Preliminary inquiry—Certification of accused's statement.

The accused appealed from a conviction of murder. His statement at the preliminary inquiry was not put in evidence against him by the prosecution as on the submission of Counsel for the accused it was doubted that the certificate had been properly certified under section 217 (4) of the Uganda Criminal Procedure Code which provides inter alia that "the statement shall be attested by the Magistrate who shall certify that such statement was taken in his presence and hearing and contains accurately the whole statement made by the accused person."

The statement in this case was certified in these terms: "Certified a true and accurate account of the accused's statement and that it was read over to him and found correct by him." The learned trial Judge indicated in his judgment that in the event of the case coming before the Court of Appeal he would welcome an expression of opinion on this point although it was not material for the decision of the case since the statement in fact was not put in evidence.

Held (2-8-38).—That if the certificate complies substantially with the pro-<br>visions of section 217 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the statement may be admitted provided always that where the statement contains something favourable to the defence it should not be excluded by reason of the failure of the magistrate to comply with the provisions of this section. (Appeal dismissed.)

Accused, absent, unrepresented.

Dennison, Crown Counsel (Kenya), for the Crown.

JUDGMENT (delivered by Sir Joseph Sheridan, C. J.).—There is ample evidence to support the view taken by the learned Chief Justice and accordingly the appeal is dismissed. In regard to the question of the statutory certificate raised by the Chief Justice although a decision of the point is unnecessary for the determination of this appeal, we think that we may express our opinion in general that provided the certificate complies substantially with the provisions of section $217$ (4) it may be admitted and provided always that where the statement contains something favourable to the defence it should not be excluded by reason of the failure of the magistrate to comply with the provisions of this section. This latter point has already been decided by this Court.

Editorial Note.-Neither the appellant's statement at the preliminary inquiry, nor the certification of it were considered or commented on by<br>the Court of Appeal in this case. The judgment merely expresses the opinion of the Court as to the general guiding principles relating to the admissibility of such statements considered in respect of their certification.

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.

Uganda Criminal Procedure Code, section 217(4)

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.