the purport of the right to presumption of innocence, which is also enshrined
in Article 7 of the Charter.”14
63. The Court further recalls:15
[a]s regards, in particular, the evidence relied on in convicting the
Applicant, the Court holds that it was indeed not incumbent on it to
decide on their [probative] value for the purposes of reviewing the said
conviction. It is however of the opinion that nothing prevents it from
examining such evidence as part of the evidence laid before it so as
to ascertain in general, whether consideration of the said evidence by
the national Judge was in conformity with the requirements of fair trial
within the meaning of Article 7 of the Charter in particular.
64. In the instant case, the Applicant challenges the conduct of the voir dire
proceedings. The record shows that the Court of Appeal found that the voir
dire proceedings did not establish that the victim understood the meaning
of the oath and the duty to speak the truth, therefore, such evidence would
be treated as unsworn evidence and would require corroboration. To this
end, the Court of Appeal held that the unsworn evidence of the complainant
was corroborated with the evidence of the victim’s mother, to whom she
reported the incident and who testified that she was crying while holding
her underwear after the rape incident. Furthermore, that Prosecution
Witness 3 – father of the complainant and Prosecution Witness 4 – the
Village Chairman testified that the Applicant had confessed to the crime
and asked for forgiveness. The Court of Appeal thus found that the
Applicant was convicted on the basis of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
65. In light of the foregoing, the Court finds that the assessment of evidence
leading to the Applicant’s conviction does not disclose any manifest error
or miscarriage of justice. The Court, therefore, dismisses this allegation.
14
Abubakari v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 174; Diocles Williams v. United Republic of Tanzania (merits
and reparations) (21 September 2018) 2 AfCLR 426, § 72; Majid Goa v. United Republic of Tanzania
(merits and reparations) (2019) 3 AfCLR 498, § 72.
15 Abubakari v. Tanzania (merits), supra, § 26.
15