Wakilii

Josiah v Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 053-2016)

African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights · [2019] AfCHPR 11 · 2019 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights challenging conviction and death sentence following dismissal of appeal by Tanzania Court of Appeal
Decision
Application dismissed; applicant remains convicted and imprisoned

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights held that it has jurisdiction to examine whether domestic courts' assessment of evidence is consistent with international human rights standards, even though it is not an appellate court. The Court found that the applicant had exhausted local remedies by appealing to Tanzania's Court of Appeal and was not required to pursue extraordinary remedies. On merits, the Court held that the Court of Appeal properly assessed the evidence, finding minor contradictions in witness testimony did not go to the root of the matter, and that the applicant's conviction was supported by credible evidence. The Court dismissed all claims of violations of rights to fair trial and equality before the law.

Outcome

Application dismissed; applicant remains convicted and imprisoned

Facts

Oscar Josiah, a Tanzanian national, married a pregnant woman in 2011. On 2 July 2012, she gave birth and the baby died the same day after allegedly being abandoned in the bush. Post-mortem examination revealed death was caused by hypoglycaemia and hypothermia. Josiah and his wife were charged with murder under Section 196 of the Penal Code. On 2 October 2015, the High Court acquitted the wife but convicted Josiah and sentenced him to death. The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal on 25 February 2016, finding prosecution witnesses' testimony credible despite minor contradictions. Three prosecution witnesses testified that Josiah led them to where the baby's body was found in the bush. Josiah's wife gave inconsistent statements but her second statement that Josiah snatched the baby and threw it in the bush was found to be true.

Issues

  1. Whether the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has jurisdiction to examine allegations of violations of human rights relating to assessment of evidence by national courts.
  2. Whether the applicant exhausted local remedies before filing the application before the African Court.
  3. Whether the Court of Appeal's judgment contained manifest errors that occasioned a miscarriage of justice in violation of the right to a fair trial.
  4. Whether the respondent state violated the applicant's right to defence under Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter.
  5. Whether the respondent state violated the applicant's right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law under Article 3 of the African Charter.

Orders

  • Objection to material jurisdiction dismissed.
  • Court has jurisdiction over the application.
  • Objection on admissibility dismissed.
  • Application declared admissible.
  • Respondent State has not violated the applicant's right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law guaranteed under Article 3(1) and (2) of the Charter.
  • Respondent State has not violated the right to a fair trial of the applicant under Article 7(1) of the Charter.
  • Applicant's prayers for reparation to quash conviction and order release dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Jurisdiction of African Court — Material Jurisdiction — Assessment of Evidence by National Courts
The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights has material jurisdiction to examine whether the manner in which domestic courts assessed evidence is compatible with international human rights standards and whether such assessment occasioned a miscarriage of justice, even though the Court is not an appellate court and does not replace itself for domestic courts in investigating details and particularities of evidence used in domestic proceedings.
Exhaustion of Local Remedies — Extraordinary Remedies — Constitutional Petitions and Review Applications
An applicant is only required to exhaust ordinary judicial remedies before filing an application before the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights. Constitutional petitions in the High Court and applications for review of the Court of Appeal's judgment are extraordinary remedies in the Tanzanian judicial system which an applicant is not required to exhaust prior to filing an application before the African Court.
Fair Trial — Assessment of Evidence — Minor Contradictions in Witness Testimony
The right to a fair trial and the right to presumption of innocence require that a person's conviction on a criminal offence resulting in severe penalty should be based on solid and credible evidence. However, minor contradictions in witness testimony that do not go to the root of the matter do not constitute a manifest error occasioning a miscarriage of justice where the most important issues for determination are consistent across witnesses' testimonies.
Right to Defence — Legal Representation — Substantiation of Claims
The right to defence under Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter, interpreted in light of Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR, includes the right to be provided with free legal assistance where the interest of justice so requires. A mere allegation without substantiation that the right to defence was violated will be dismissed where the record shows the applicant had defence counsel at trial and appellate levels, was able to testify and call witnesses, and had all grounds of appeal addressed by the appellate court.

Legislation cited (17)

  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 22
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 27(1)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 34(6)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 5(3)
  • Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 6(2)
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 3
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 7
  • African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights Article 56
  • Rules of Court Rule 8(2)
  • Rules of Court Rule 30
  • Rules of Court Rule 39(1)
  • Rules of Court Rule 40
  • International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 14(3)(d)
  • Constitution of Tanzania Articles 12 and 13
  • Penal Code of Tanzania s.196
  • Criminal Procedure Act of Tanzania s.293(2)

Cases cited (9)

  • Peter Joseph Chacha v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 003/2014)
  • Ernest Francis Mtingwi v Republic of Malawi (Application No. 001/2013)
  • Werema Wangoko Werema and Waisiri Wangoko Werema v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 024/2015)
  • Alex Thomas v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 005/2013)
  • Mohamed Abubakari v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 007/2013)
  • Kennedy Owino Onyanchi and Another v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 003/2015)
  • Wilfred Onyango Nganyi and 9 Others v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 006/2013)
  • Kijiji Isiaga v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 023/2015)
  • Mgosi Mwita Makungu v United Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 006/2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Josiah v Republic of Tanzania (Application No. 053-2016) [2019] AfCHPR 11 (28 March 2019)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.