Rex v Jama (Criminal Appeal No. 319 of 1945)
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 Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against conviction under section 8 of the Outlying Districts Ordinance for speaking in a manner calculated to cause disaffection among natives of a closed district. Although the charges were defective in not stating the words allegedly spoken, no failure of justice occurred because the appellant heard the witnesses' evidence, cross-examined them, and gave evidence himself. The evidence adequately supported the convictions on all four counts.
Outcome
Convictions and sentences upheld
Facts
The appellant, a licensee of the Somali (Isaak) tribe living in the Northern Frontier Closed District, was charged on six counts under section 8 of the Outlying Districts Ordinance with speaking in a manner calculated to cause disaffection among natives of the Garissa area towards Government. He was acquitted on the first two counts but convicted on counts three through six. The evidence showed that the appellant made false statements about government proposals regarding the Abd Wak section, including claims that boundaries had been secretly fixed, that chiefs had paid money to buy Abd Wak land, and that the Abd Wak people would be forced to dig wells and work as labourers. Witnesses testified that these statements made them angry and caused them to consider leaving Kenya or fighting other tribes. The appellant was sentenced to two months' hard labour on each count, to run consecutively.
Issues
- Whether defective charges that did not state the words alleged to have been spoken invalidated the proceedings and occasioned a failure of justice.
- Whether the evidence was adequate to support the convictions on counts three, four, five and six.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Outlying Districts Ordinance s.8
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.