Watson v R (Misc. Criminal Cause 21 of 2016) [2018] MWHC 1019 (9 June 2018)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALA WI ZOMBA DISTRICT REGISTRY MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CAUSE NO. 21 OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 118 AND 161G OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE CODE AND IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 42(2)(e) OF THE REPUBLIC OF MALA WI CONSTITUTION BETWEEN FILIPO WATSON AND APPLICANT THE STATE.................................................................... RESPONDENT CORAM Ntaba J. ZNTABA,J. Mr. P. Chinguwo, Counsel for the Applicant Mr. A. Salamba, Counsel for the Respondent Mr. D. Banda, Court Clerk 1.0 BACKGROUND RULING 1.1 1.2 The High Court, State Advocate Chambers, Legal Aid Bureau, Malawi Prison Services and the Paralegal Advisory Services noted that the number of homicide remandees in the Eastern Judicial Region was alarming embarked on prison camp courts in order to hear bail applications. The parties agreed that for these bail applications to take place within the bail premises on The .court decided that during this process it will allow for both the Applicant and State to make oral applications and submissions instead of sworn affidavits. Notably the State and PASI verified the facts relating to the date of the offence, where the offence took place as well as the particulars of the deceased, offender as well as the stage of the investigations. The rationale for these applications and bail camp courts were to ascertain the number of homicide remandees who Filipo Watson v Republic - have who have been in remand for more than the required statutory period and see if prison service which is overcrowded could be relieved. Furthermore, it was an opportunity for those accused person on remand to have an opportunity to be brought before court and be dealt with. Lastly, it was to allow the justice system to take stock of cases which might be speeded to trial. · 1.3 The applications were brought under section 42(2)(e) of the Republic of Malawi Constitution as well as sections 61 G and 118 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code. 2.0 THE BAIL APPLICATION 2.1 2.2 The Applicant, Phillip Watson aged 28 and hails from Harry village under Traditional Authority Ganyain Ntcheu district. The Applicant highlighted that when he was arrested in 13th August, 2015. He disclosed that he is currently serving a fourteen year imprisonment for rape which will lapse in 2024. He therefore was withdrawing his bail application as to do so would be an academic exercise however they stated that since the case docket was ready, he believed that his murder case will be coming for trial soon. The State in response agreed that it would be fotile for the bail application to proceed. They also agreed that the Applicant does need to know the fate of his murder charge as it was a consequential result of the offence of rape. It was in the best interest of justice that the matter be concluded within the best reas9nable period of time. The State's only contention was that despite the case docket being ready but since there is a ban by the Legal Aid Bureau on homicides although informal, such would delay the matter. 2.0 ORDER 2.1 This court has noted that the Applicant is serving time for the offence of rape. Furtper that his sentence shall lapse in 2024. The Court agrees with both the Applicant and State that the bail application be withdrawn. However, noting that the Applicant has not been committed, the State cannot be saying its trial ready. The State must do the necessary steps as outlined in the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code as regards committal. 2.2 I therefore order that the Applicant be committed to the High Court by 301h April, 2016. Furthennore, the State is ordered to prosecute the Applicant by 3 pt December, 2016. I order accordingly . • Made in chambers this 9th day of June, 2016. @~ Z. J. V. Ntaba Judge Filipo Watson v Republic 2