- Though these proceedings were commenced through what is described as a Constitutional Petition, they just constitute an application for review of sentence, as there are no constitutional issues raised herein.
- The applicant was tried and convicted of incest contrary to Section 20(1) of the Sexual Offences Act in Voi SPM Criminal Case No. 712 of 2014 and sentenced to life imprisonment.
- He appealed in Voi High Court Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 2015, and according to his own averments in the pleadings, the conviction was upheld by the High Court but sentence reduced to 25 years imprisonment.
- Again, according to his own pleadings, he appealed to the Court of Appeal in Criminal Appeal No. 79 of 2022 which appeal was dismissed.
- He has now come to this court and filed certificates of achievements and knowledge he has acquired while in prison and asked for further review of sentence. The applicant filed written submissions while the Director of Public Prosecutions made short submissions.
- In the applicant’s long written submissions, he listed the charges he faced in the trial court, stating that this court has jurisdiction to entertain these proceedings under Article 165 of the Constitution, and highlighted his personal circumstances and has pleaded remorsefulness in seeking review of sentence.
- On their part, Mr. Sirima the Prosecuting Counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions has argued orally that no constitutional issue has been raised, and that the petition should thus be dismissed.
- Having considered the application herein, documents filed and the submissions on both sides, I find no constitutional issue raised. What is sought herein is merely a review of the sentence imposed which can only be done under Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap.75), and recent court decisions, such as the decision of the Supreme Court in Muruatetu =Versus= Republic (2015) eKLR.
- The present application however, does not fall within the parameters for this court to review jurisdiction above, as this court has on appeal already reduced the life sentence initially imposed on the applicant to 25 years imprisonment. Further the Court of Appeal already has upheld the reviewed sentence of 25 years imprisonment.
- Thus, this court cannot further review its own sentence, which has been confirmed and upheld by the Court of Appeal. The only avenue open to the applicant in my view, is to approach the Supreme Court.
- I thus find no merits in the application. The application is herewith dismissed. Right of appeal explained.
Dated, signed and delivered this 20th day of March 2024 in open court at Voi.