Wakilii

Rex v Kirundi (Cr. App. 117-1933.)

East African Court of Appeal · [1937] EACA 65 · 1937 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction by the Supreme Court of Kenya
Decision
Conviction upheld despite exclusion of improperly attested statement

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 held that a statement made by an accused under section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code must be properly certified by the magistrate as required by section 219(4). Where the statement is not certified, it should be excluded from evidence at trial. The mandatory provisions of section 219(4) must be construed strictly, and failure to conform renders the statement inadmissible. However, the Court found sufficient evidence apart from the excluded statement to support the conviction.

Outcome

Conviction upheld despite exclusion of improperly attested statement

Facts

The appellant was convicted by the Supreme Court of Kenya. During the preliminary inquiry before the committing magistrate, the appellant made a statement under section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code in which he admitted his guilt. This statement was put in evidence at trial before the Supreme Court. Before the Supreme Court, the appellant stated that the interpreter had misrepresented what he said. The statement made before the magistrate was not properly certified as required by section 219(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Crown Counsel conceded that the statement should be excluded for this reason.

Issues

  1. Whether a statement made by the accused under section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code that was not properly attested before the committing magistrate should have been excluded at trial.
  2. Whether the remaining evidence was sufficient to support the conviction independently of the improperly attested statement.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Criminal Procedure — Preliminary Inquiry — Statement of Accused — Certification Requirements
A statement made by an accused person under section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code at a preliminary inquiry must be properly attested and certified by the magistrate in accordance with section 219(4), and failure to comply with these mandatory provisions renders the statement inadmissible at trial.
Evidence — Admissibility — Statements by Accused — Statutory Requirements
The mandatory provisions of section 219(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code requiring certification of an accused's statement must be construed strictly, and a magistrate's general statement that the provisions were complied with is not equivalent to the required certificate.
Criminal Appeals — Sufficiency of Evidence — Exclusion of Inadmissible Evidence
Where inadmissible evidence has been considered at trial, an appellate court must determine whether the remaining admissible evidence is of such weight that it is highly improbable the trial judge would have arrived at a different conclusion had the inadmissible evidence been excluded.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Kenya Criminal Procedure Code s.219
  • Kenya Criminal Procedure Code s.219(4)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Kirundi (Cr. App. 117-1933.) [1937] EACA 65 (1 January 1937)
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.