S V KAPURIRA 1992 (2) ZLR 17 (S)

S v KAPURIRA 1992 (2) ZLR 17 (S)

Flynote

Jurisdiction — murder — alleged murderer and victim both Zimbabwean citizens — fatal blow struck when parties in foreign country — but victim brought back to Zimbabwe and dying there — whether Zimbabwean courts have jurisdiction to try case

Headnote

The appellant and another person, who were both Zimbabwean citizens, had crossed into Mocambique in order to attend a beer drink there. The appellant had allegedly attacked his fellow Zimbabwean and had fatally wounded him. The victim had been taken back to Zimbabwean where he died of bleeding from the wound. When the appellant returned to Zimbabwe he was arrested and charged with murder. The High Court decided that it had jurisdiction to try this case and the appellant appealed against this decision.

Held that generally the courts favoured the approach of basing jurisdiction upon place of impact or intended impact.

Held, further, that the courts would not readily surrender their jurisdiction especially where the principles of comity and effectiveness were satisfied. The comity principle would be satisfied where there was no danger of offending another state by exercising jurisdiction in the matter and the effectiveness principle would be satisfied where the court is able to reach the people involved and so give effect to its Judgment.

Held, further, that in the present case jurisdiction had been properly assumed. Although the murderous attack had taken place in Mocambique, a substantial and essential element of the crime, namely the death of the victim, had taken place in Zimbabwe. Both parties involved were Zimbabweans so Zimbabwe was the country most interested in takingaction. The principle of comity was satisfied as there was no risk of offending the Mocambican authorities, courts or people as the crime was of minimal interest to them. The principle of effectiveness was also satisfied because the appellant was under arrest in Zimbabwe.