Mukamambo v People (Appeal 27 of 1983) [1987] ZMSC 73 (15 September 1987)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA. AT NDOLA Application No 27/1983 (Criminal Jurisdiction) IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: PATRICK MUKAMAMBO APPLICANT vs THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT CORAM: Ngulube, D. C. J., Gardner and Sakala, JJ. S. 15th September, 1987 For the Appellant : In person For the Respondent : R. O. Okafor, Senior State Advocate JUDGMENT Ngulube, D. C. J., delivered the Judgment of the court. The applicant received two lots of twelve months imprisonment concurrent for forgery and uttering. The forgery related to a photocopy of a Form y certificate and the uttering was its production to the police authorities. The evidence that was accepted by the learned trial magistrate was that, when PW1 visited Mpika, the applicant approached him and told him that he was a Form V but was being paid a Grade Seven constable’s salary. The applicant, according to the evidence given, joined the Tazara police in 1974 as a Grade Seven and, after he had complained to PW1 in September 1978, when the Tazara police was merged with Zambia police, the applicant was asked to produce his Cambridge school certificate so that his salary could be changed to that of a Form V. Eventually the police authorities received by post a Form V certificate. It is common ground, on the evidence, that the Form V certificate showed a centre number and a student number relating to one Manda who had failed his examinations at Lundazi Secondary School and, at the same time the certificate showed that the applicant had passed his Form V at Rusangu Secondary School in the Southern Province. There 2/............................................... was was evidence from the school authorities that the only Ignatius Mukamambo that they had was/student who had come J2 : a from St. Mark’s Secondary School and who had failed his examination, passing only in the English language. That was a result which was totally different from that reflected on the applicant's photocopy of the certificate. The applicant would have us believe that the photocopy which he had was a photocopy of a genuine certificate as received by himself from the school and that even he had queried the head of the school as to why his certificate was showing the wrong centre number. The applicant remained mute at his trial with the result that the evidence for the prosecution, all of which was against him, remained uncontroverted. .. We find it amazing that a person who claims that he had genuinely attended at a school was unable in anyway to assist to establish such a simple fact which those of us who have been to a secondary ; school could easily establish. We find, upon considering all the arguments and all the grounds advanced by the applicant, that there is no merit whatsoever in this application. We refuse the application. M. S. Ngulube DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE B. T. Gardner SUPREME COURT JUDGE E. L. Sakala SUPREME COURT JUDGE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA Appeal No 108/1986 AT NDOLA (Criminal Jurisdiction) IN THE MATTER BETWEENt SHADRECK MHANGO APPELLANT AND THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT CORAMi Ngulube, D. C. J., Gardner and Sakala, JJ. S. 15th September, 198? For the Appellant i In Person For the Respondent » J. M. Mwanaehonga, Senior State Advocate JUDGMENT Ngulube, D. C. J. delivered the judgment of the court* The appellant was tried and convicted on a charge of aggravated robbery. The particulars were that on 1st December, 1985, Jointly and whilst acting together with another person unknown, he stole a pair of shoes and K22 cash from the complainant, and that at the time violence was applied against the complainant. There was no doubt whatsoever that on the night in question, the appellant and another person staged the robbery when they grabbed the complainant and beat her up and took her property. Unfortunately for the appellant, the complainant got hold : ' of him and hung on to him whilst calling for help. The appellant was, as the saying goes, caught in the act. He received the mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years and he appeals to this court against such sentence. We wish to take this opportunity to remind persons convicted of this offence that, with the possible exception of Juveniles, they are all liable to receive a 2/ mandatory i J2 J mandatory minimum sentence of at least fifteen years imprisonment. No appeal can lie against a sentence which is fixed by law because anything less than fifteen years would be an unlawful sentence. The appeal in this respect was incompetent and misconcieved. We suggest further that in future the Master of the Supreme Court should not even accept such appeals. The appeal is dismissed. M. S. Ngulube DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE B. T. Gardner SUPREME COURT JUDGE E. L. Sakala SUPREME COURT JUDGE