MZUMBE UNIVERSITY

MBEYA CAMPUS

NAME: JACKLINE THOMAS

REG NUMBER: 31210062/T.19

SUBJECT NAME: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

SUBJECT CODE :038

NAME OF LECTURER: MAD. KOMBA

NATURE OF ASSIGNMENT: INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

DATE OF SUBMITION: 26/06/2020

QUESTION.

Juakali is charged with a murder.The prosecution persuades the court to admit as a confession to the
charge of the murder the statement made by Juakali before the police constable, James, that the panga
which was used to kill the deceased belongs to me. The prosecution also persuades the court to admit
as a confession the statement made by Juakali to one, Mwakafulila the village chairman that he will not
sit down and rest until when the soul of Mwijomaa, the deceased vanishes to hell. The advocated
representing Juakali objects to the admissibility of the two statements as confession to the to the charge
of murder and advances the argument that the first statement does not have all ingredients needed for
valid confession that the second statement, though given by his client but it was under the influence of
anger and sickness during the time of utterance and that it was given to a person who was not
recognized by the law to receive confession.

Assume that you are the judge who is presiding over this case, with authorities , discuss this scenario.
TABLE OF CONTENT

 ISSUE
 LAW APPLICABLE
 ADVISE
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCE
ISSUE

-Whether the confession given is admissible?

-Whether the police officer has authority in making confession?

There is a confession, due to there are other circumstances in which not every inducement has the
effect on confession involuntary and that confession accused by induced, threat or promise can be
admissible unless such inducement was likely to cause untrue admission of guilt of a person, this is
provided under section 29 read together with section 30 of The Evidence Act1 which states that
confession made after the removal of impression caused by inducement, threat, or promise need not be
rejected ,this was held in the case of ingredient confession will be the valid if made freely and
voluntarily. Voluntariness of a confession is a key component in the admissibility of a confession..

The confession made as a result of a promise of secrecy or deception regardless he was not warned
that he was not bound to make such confession is relevant and admissible under Section 32 of The
Evidence Act2, the court may reflect to admit such confession made voluntary or rendered unfair to a
person this was stated in the case NAYINDA VS R3. According to the scenario the Advocate of Juakali
complain that Juakali was anger and sick during confession but due to the case of NAYINDA VS
REPUBLIC there are circumstances where by a person is known to be the one who committe a crime but
he doesn’t want to confess due to that the promise and the other way will be used so that the person
can confess.

When confession leading to the discovery of a new thing relates to the fact in issue is relevant as it was
held in the case of JOHN PETER SHAO VS REPUBLIC4 court held that since an accused mentioned things
stolen that hidden somewhere is admissible. According to the scenario the confession given by Juakali
mention that the panga which used to kill the deceased belongs to him, Juakali so due to that the
confession is admissible before the court.

There is a confession, due to the case of MATHEI FIDOLINE HAULE v REPUBLIC5 the court of Appeal
states that “A confession within the context of criminal law is one which admit in terms of offence
charged”.

The confession refers toward or conduct of both words and conducts from which whether taken alone
with other facts proved, an inference may reasonably be drawn that the person who said the words or
did the act committed an offence

There is a confession which is admissible by the court, due to the case of SONGWE NGEDELELE v
REPUBLIC6 states that “A confession is a direct acknowledgment of a guilty on the party of accused and
admission is a statement by the accused, direct or implied of facts pertinent to the issue of tending, in
issue of tending, in connection with proof of other facts to prove his guilty, but of his self is insufficient
to authorize a conviction”.

1
Cap 6 RE 2000
2
Ibid
3
(1959)EA 688
4
(1998)TLR 198
5
(1992)TLR 148
6
(1968) HCD No 178
The police officer has the authority to listen to the accused confession, Due to the According to section
51 and 57 and 59 of The Magistrate’s Court Act7 provides that officer of district, town, municipal or city
council are justice of peace who has assigned the power to hear, take and record the confession of a
person in custody of a police and such confession in admissible. It further stated under section 28 of The
Evidence Act8 that a confessions which is freely and voluntarily made by a person accused of an offence
in presence of the magistrate or justice of the peace is admissible as an extra judicial statements.

The presence of the chairperson is admissible, due to a case of SHIHOBE SENI AND ANOTHER VS
REPUBLUC9 in this case the court held a village chairman is person with authority under section 27(3) of
The Evidence Act and therefore the confession was admissible as there were not induced by threat,
promise or other prejudice.

ADVISE

As a judge I will look to all ingredients of the confession used in the case and due to the nature of the
case to that and to the scenario above the accused Juakali is convicted to the case of murder and I will
take the procedures to punish Juakali.

As the confession is admissible, and as a judge,I will use the law accordingly so as the accused person
who is Juakali can get the punishment he deserve.Because due to the all ingredients of the confession
are full and admissible.

CONCLUSION

The confession requires importance things which leads to the person to be guilty or not guilty the
requirements are like confession must be made to an authorized person. Section 27 (1) and Section 28,
which provides the list of persons who can receive confession to include police officer, justice of peace
and magistrates respectively. Hence the confession made to other person than the above, will be invalid
under the law. ingredient confession will be the valid if made freely and voluntarily. Voluntariness of a
confession is a key component in the admissibility of a confession.

7
Cap 11 RE 2019
8
Cap 6 RE 2000
9
(1992) TLR 330
REFERENCES

STATUTES

 The Law of Magistrate Court Cap 11 Revised Edition 2019

CASES

 Nayinda V Republic (1959) EA 688