Sentencing Powers of the High Court in Tanzania

Sentencing Powers of the High Court and Other Courts in Tanzania Under the Criminal Procedure Act [CAP. 20 R.E. 2022]

The Criminal Procedure Act [CAP. 20 R.E. 2022] sets out the sentencing powers of the High Court, along with guidelines on how multiple convictions and illegally obtained evidence should be handled. Section 166 gives the High Court full authority to impose any sentence or make any order permitted by law. This provision underscores the court's jurisdiction to mete out appropriate justice in accordance with statutory limits and judicial discretion.

Section 167 elaborates on how courts may lawfully combine various types of sentences. Any court can issue a combination of punishments, such as imprisonment and fines, provided each element is within its legal sentencing limits. However, if a subordinate court excluding resident or senior district magistrates issues a corporal punishment sentence along with imprisonment, the corporal punishment must first be confirmed by the High Court before it can be executed. Importantly, when considering its sentencing jurisdiction under section 164, a court can impose the full term of imprisonment allowed by law, in addition to imprisonment for default of fine payment. Courts may also prohibit parole for certain prisoners, but they must clearly state the reasons behind such a decision.

Section 168 addresses the situation where a person is convicted of multiple offences in a single trial. The High Court may impose several punishments, with each sentence of imprisonment running consecutively or concurrently, based on the court’s direction. Similarly, subordinate courts can also issue multiple punishments within their jurisdiction. However, the law imposes clear limits on their authority. For instance, when imposing only imprisonment, subordinate courts cannot exceed an aggregate of ten years if one of the offences carries a potential sentence of more than five years, or eight years in other cases. For fines, the maximum aggregate depends on whether any single offence permits a fine exceeding ten thousand shillings. A combination of imprisonment and fines also faces capped limits: ten years of imprisonment and a total of thirty thousand shillings in fines, subject to variations based on the nature of offences.

For the purposes of appeal or confirmation, all sentences given at one trial for multiple offences are considered a single sentence (Section 168(4)). However, if imprisonment terms are concurrent, only the longest term counts towards the aggregate sentence. Furthermore, in cases involving sexual offences under the Sexual Offences Special Provisions Act, sentencing must strictly follow the provisions of that Act and the Minimum Sentences Act.

Section 169 introduces safeguards regarding the admissibility of evidence obtained through unlawful means. Courts have the discretion to exclude such evidence unless convinced that its admission is in the public interest and does not unfairly infringe on the rights and freedoms of individuals. In deciding whether to admit such evidence, courts may consider factors like the seriousness of the offence, the urgency of preserving evidence, the nature of the legal breach, and whether the same evidence could have been lawfully obtained. The burden of proof lies with the party seeking to admit the disputed evidence, and any exclusion must be based on the significance of the breach and its impact on the fairness of the trial. Moreover, courts are required to state the reasons behind excluding such evidence, reinforcing transparency and accountability.