Court of Appeal strikes out appeal filed by murder convict
Kavigi was convicted of murder and sentenced to death over the shooting of Festo Rwagamigano in August 1995 in Mugono cell, Itojo sub-county, Rwampara county, in Mbarara district.
A panel comprising Justices Dr Asa Mugenyi, Florence Nakachwa and Stella Alibateese referred the case back to the Criminal Division of the High Court after finding that the second memorandum of appeal had been filed outside the prescribed time.
Uganda's Court of Appeal has struck out a second memorandum of appeal filed by Edson Kavigi, a man convicted of murder, and directed that his case be scheduled for hearing based on his original appeal before the High Court.
A panel comprising Justices Dr Asa Mugenyi, Florence Nakachwa and Stella Alibateese referred the case back to the Criminal Division of the High Court after finding that the second memorandum of appeal had been filed outside the prescribed time.
“Rule 2(2) of the Rules of this court empowers the court to strike out any document that is irregular or amounts to an abuse of process. The second memorandum falls within this category, as it was filed outside the prescribed timelines and introduced new grounds after the hearing date. The practice requires that appeals proceed on properly filed pleadings date. Allowing the second memorandum to stand would undermine procedural certainty and prejudice the respondent,” said Justice Mugenyi.
A memorandum of appeal is a legal document in which an aggrieved party sets out the grounds for challenging a court decision before a higher court.
Kavigi was convicted of murder and sentenced to death over the shooting of Festo Rwagamigano in August 1995 in Mugono cell, Itojo sub-county, Rwampara county, in Mbarara district.
The appellant (Kavigi) later recorded a charge-and-caution statement in which he allegedly admitted involvement in the killing and implicated other accused persons. He was subsequently charged with murder and convicted after a full trial.
However, in his appeal, Kavigi challenged the trial judge’s decision to admit his charge-and-caution statement as a confession, arguing that it was improperly admitted and that the prosecution had not presented sufficient corroborating evidence to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
He also challenged the death sentence, arguing that the trial judge failed to apply the proper principles governing the imposition of capital punishment and did not adequately consider consistency in sentencing.
Kavigi further argued that the lower court failed to provide him with a fair, speedy and public sentencing hearing, resulting in an unconstitutional and unlawful delay.