Damiani Grevas v. R (1970) HCD 217
Penology
“I also find
that the substantial justice of the case in this particular case is that
the appellant did possess the moshi as charged and that to acquit the appellant
on the ground that the glass of moshi was improperly admitted in evidence would
be acting contrary to the provisions of section 32(2) of the Magistrates Court
Act. This section if very important in our present system of our courts. It
takes into account that justice has to be administered justly to all citizens
and that the majority of the magistrates are laymen. The section has been
created in order to balance the situation. It is also serving another important
purpose and that is it fosters good understanding between the citizens and the
court because it enable them to understand the law under which they are
administered. It is important for the masses to have some understanding of the
functioning of the forces of law and order. They must feel that they are there
for their benefit and not mere abstract conceptions imposed on hem. An
acquittal, for example, in such a clear case of guilt as the one under
consideration because of undue regard to technicalities would have resulted in
a very bad understating of the courts by those members of the public conversant
of the facts of the case. They would have wondered whether the courts were for
them or for invisible human beings”
No comments:
Post a Comment