Canine evidence

My brother is accused of murder. During the trial, the prosecution relied on evidence of a police tracker who was enlisted to assist with the investigation a few hours following the murder. The prosecution’s case was that the tracker dog was exposed to items at the crime scene where it picked up a human scent before charging to my brother’s house. My brother claims he is innocent and that his scent was picked at the deceased’s house since he had sold to the deceased some items the day before the murder incident. How will the Court treat the evidence against my brother? Also, can this evidence be interpreted incorrectly? Please enlighten me.
JM, Arusha

Sorry to hear about your brother. While we do not know all the facts of the case against your brother, your question suggests the prosecution has based its case on the canine evidence obtained during the investigation. The law on canine evidence is still in its infancy in Tanzania. The number of cases that have put this evidence to the test in our jurisdiction is limited. Nonetheless, we will provide you a general overview of how canine evidence is treated in Tanzania. In the few cases we reviewed, it is clear that Courts agree this evidence is very helpful in criminal cases. However, they also warn that it might also be more harmful than helpful if it is not thoroughly examined to establish its credibility.

In a recent case the Court of Appeal reviewed the legal framework governing the admissibility and reliability of such evidence in Kenya, Uganda, United States of America and India to make its own finding. In the end, the Court adopted the approach in India that such evidence cannot be accepted and used against an accused individual without first considering three principles. First, the qualifications of the dog handler must be property established, in general, and then evidence must be given in relation to the behaviour and skills of the particular tracker dog. Second, there must be detailed basic evidence about the reliability of the dog in issue and about the skills and reliability of the individual dog as a tracker, before evidence can properly be adduced by the dog handler about the tracking of a scent by the specific dog. Third, the evidence on the preservation of the crime scene where the evidence was obtained is of uttermost importance.

While it is true canine evidence may be interpreted incorrectly, Courts have accepted it when a strong evidentiary basis has been established. The Court of Appeal has recently held that the probative value of canine evidence would inevitably depend on the specific facts of each case by weighing the dog’s skill and reliability along with its behaviour.  Further, canine evidence alone cannot be used to establish a conviction, the evidence would only be deemed verified if it was backed up by independent, corroborative evidence. It is therefore the task of the prosecution to ensure the canine evidence on record is substantiated and credible. Your lawyer can guide you further.

Death sentence on a minor

My son was involved in a street gang which compromised his behaviour. 5 years ago, he found himself in trouble at school for causing the death of a fellow student. He was a sixteen year old minor when the killing occurred. The case against him took years to be decided. He is now an adult and was sentenced to death by hanging. I do not condone my son’s behaviour but I believe the sentence was unlawful.
FM, Iringa

We agree with you that the death sentence was unlawful since the law prohibits passing the death sentence on a minor. Section 26(2) of the Penal Code, Cap 16 [R.E 2022] provides that the sentence of death shall not be pronounced on or recorded against any person who at the time of the commission of the offence was under 18 years of age.  The section goes further that in lieu of the sentence of death, the Court shall sentence that person to be detained during the President’s pleasure and if so sentenced he shall be liable to be detained in such place and under such conditions as the Minister for the time being responsible for legal affairs may direct, and whilst so detained shall be deemed to be in legal custody.

You can see that the above provision expressly prohibits imposition of the sentence of death upon any person who at the time of the commission of the offence was under 18 years of age. Instead, the Court in question must order the accused to be held in custody for as long as the President pleases. Your lawyer can guide you further on the necessary steps of an appeal.

Time limit for prosecuting sexual harassment

There is a famous musician in a foreign country who is currently facing allegations of sexual harassment. From what I have heard, some of the women coming forward with these sexual harassment claims surprisingly allege the act occurred more than twenty years ago. While I do not condone the harassment, I cannot help but wonder whether there is a time limit on prosecuting sexual harassment and what is the legal position in Tanzania?
GR, Dar es Salaam

Each country has their own time limit on reporting sexual harassment. Since you have not mentioned this foreign country, we cannot discuss its legal position. In the case of Tanzania, section 138D of the Penal Code, Cap. 16 [R.E 2022] prohibits acts that may amount to the offence of sexual harassment. However, subsection 5 states that no prosecution for an offence under this section shall be instituted or continued where the complaint is made by the alleged victim at any time more than 60 days after the occurrence of the event constituting the offence.