Friday, April 11, 2025 - The Supreme Court of Kenya has today dismissed an appeal filed by Ruth Wanjiku Kamande, popularly known as Miss Lang’ata, who was convicted in 2015 for the murder of her boyfriend, Farid Mohamed Halim.
Kamande moved to the Supreme Court, urging it to consider
the applicability of the doctrine of Battered Woman Syndrome as part of her
defence.
However, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on the
grounds that the issue of Battered Woman Syndrome had not been raised during
the trial at the High Court or in the Court of Appeal.
The Court held that legal issues not previously addressed in
lower courts cannot be introduced at the Supreme Court level.
Kamande’s appeal was based on claims that the learned judges
of the Court of Appeal erred in law by failing to consider and apply the
doctrine of Battered Woman Syndrome when evaluating whether her actions could
be reconciled with self-defence.
She also argued that both the High Court and the Court of
Appeal failed to fully assess the defence of self-defence she had advanced, and
that the prosecution had not conclusively rebutted the elements of that
defence, which she argued should have led to a reduced charge of manslaughter.
In response, the Office of the Director of Public
Prosecutions (ODPP) submitted a replying affidavit arguing that the appeal
lacked merit.
The DPP noted that the grounds raised had not been
introduced in earlier proceedings.
Specifically, there had been no mention of Battered Woman
Syndrome, nor was there any medical evidence submitted at trial to indicate
that Kamande had experienced prolonged intimate partner violence.
Furthermore, the DPP pointed out that Kamande chose to give
an unsworn statement, which meant her claims could not be tested through
cross-examination.
The prosecution, represented by Ms. Fredah Mwanza and Ms.
Magdalene Ngalyuka, further argued that while the doctrine of Battered Woman
Syndrome could, in some cases, inform a defence of insanity or self-defence,
the accused bears the burden of proving such a defence on a balance of
probabilities.
They added that self-defence requires the accused to show
that they perceived an imminent threat and used reasonable force in response,
thresholds that the appellant failed to meet.
In its determination, the Supreme Court found the
appellant’s claims contradictory.
It held that Kamande's evidence depicted a typical romantic
relationship rather than one characterized by long-standing abuse.
The Court noted that there was no history of sustained or
severe violence brought forth, and the alleged altercation with the deceased
appeared to have occurred solely on the day of the incident.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Martha Koome, Deputy
Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, and Justices Mohamed Ibrahim, Smokin Wanjala,
and Njoki Ndung’u, also highlighted that Kamande's choice to give an unsworn
statement deprived the prosecution of the opportunity to test her evidence
through cross-examination.
The judges further underscored that the doctrine of Battered
Woman Syndrome had never been explicitly or implicitly raised during the trial
or appellate proceedings, despite being a well-established concept in legal
doctrine since the 1970s.
It was only brought up for the first time in the application
for certification before the Court of Appeal.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court found the appeal to be without
merit and affirmed the rulings of the lower courts.
Via: ODPP
Go and Subscribe to our YouTube
Channel and get the best videos around the country, go HERE>>>
0 Comments