Wakilii

Rex v Sekoni and Another (Criminal Appeals Nos. 66 and 67 of 1947)

East African Court of Appeal · [1947] EACA 26 · 1947 Appeal Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeals from convictions for murder in the High Court of Uganda
Decision
Convictions for murder upheld; both appellants remain convicted

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 held that there is no rule of law or practice requiring the evidence of accessories after the fact to be corroborated. While lies and evasions by an accused do not themselves prove guilt, they may be taken into account along with other evidence when considering guilt or innocence. The appeals were dismissed, with the convictions for murder upheld on the basis of circumstantial evidence from three witnesses who were accessories after the fact.

Outcome

Convictions for murder upheld; both appellants remain convicted

Facts

The appellants were convicted of murdering Tomasi Mubiru. Three witnesses testified that after a beer party, the appellants followed the deceased into darkness, the first appellant carrying a rifle. The witnesses heard someone call Mubiru, then two gunshots. The second appellant instructed the three witnesses to carry the body away, offering them payment. They carried the body to a distant place and burned it completely. The first appellant admitted his role to other witnesses. The first appellant gave evasive statements to police denying his presence at the beer party. The defence attempted to prove the deceased was still alive by calling witnesses who claimed to have seen a man named Tomasi Mubiru after the alleged murder, but the trial judge found this evidence unreliable.

Issues

  1. Whether the evidence of accessories after the fact requires corroboration as a matter of law or practice.
  2. Whether untrue statements by an accused person can be taken into account when assessing guilt.
  3. Whether common purpose was established between the two appellants in the commission of murder.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Accessories After the Fact — Corroboration Not Required
There is no rule of law or practice which requires the evidence of accessories after the fact to be corroborated before a conviction can be sustained.
Evidence — Lies and Evasions by Accused — Evidential Value
Although lies and evasions on the part of an accused do not in themselves prove the correctness of facts alleged against him, they may, if on material issues, be taken into account along with other matters and the evidence as a whole when considering his guilt or innocence.
Evidence — False Statements — Effect on Proved Opportunity
False statements made by an accused may give to a proved opportunity to commit a crime a different complexion from what it would have borne had no such false statement been made.
Criminal Law — Murder — Common Purpose — Aiding and Abetting
Where one accused calls the deceased back and another shoots him immediately thereafter, common purpose is established even if the first accused did not actually fire the fatal shot, as he aided the one who did.

Cases cited (4)

  • Rex v Gas Ibrahim (Criminal Appeal No. 267 of 1945)
  • Dawson v McKenzie (1908) 45 SLR 474
  • R. v. Kinyangabwartt s/o Matasa, 9 E.A.C.A. 90
  • R. v. John s/o Ngona and others. 11 E.A.C.A. 119

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Sekoni and Another (Criminal Appeals Nos. 66 and 67 of 1947) [1947] EACA 26 (1 January 1947)
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.