Musisi v Republic

• Jurisdiction: Kenya
• Date: 21 February 1969
• Court: High Court (Kenya)

Kenya, High Court.

(Mwendwa C.J., Trevelyan J.)

Musisi

and

Republic

Jurisdiction In general Territorial Territorial limits of jurisdiction Forged documents posted in Uganda for delivery in Kenya Whether crime committed in Kenya and subject to jurisdiction of Kenyan courts The law of Kenya

Summary: The facts.The appellant, an employee of the Kenya Government, went on a course to Uganda. Whilst there he falsely made a claim upon the Government for the alleged purchase of books. He transmitted by post two forged invoices which were detected upon arrival in Nairobi. He was consequently prosecuted in Nairobi on his return, on four counts, one each for uttering two invoices and one each for attempting to obtain the sums thereof by false pretences. He was convicted by the Magistrate.

He appealed, contending inter alia that as the claims were posted in Uganda the courts of Kenya had no jurisdiction.

Held: The appeal must be dimissed. A person who is himself in one country may, by the hands of an innocent agent, commit a crime in another country (and thereby be subject to the jurisdiction of its courts) although he cannot be tried until he comes to that other country.

The following is the text of the judgment of the Court (delivered by Mwendwa, C.J.):

The appellant, an employee of the Kenya Government, went on a course to Uganda. Whilst there he made, and we have no doubt that he falsely made, upon his employer a claim or claims for the alleged purchase of books. We use the expression a claim or claims because as we understand what we were told, and we can only trust that our understanding is correct, he claimed to have paid for books invoiced in sums of Shs. 110/65 and Shs. 212/20 but sought to be given the sum of Shs. 400/- as an allowance, i.e. a general allowance for books.

The appellant transmitted, by means of the postal administration, two forged invoiceswe do not doubt that they were forgedbut they were detected upon arrival in Nairobi, as a consequence he got no money but was prosecuted instead. He was charged, here in Nairobi, with four counts, one each for uttering the two invoices and one each for attempting to obtain the sums thereof by false pretences.

In this appeal the appellant contends that his guilt was not established but we have no doubt that his dishonest conduct was proved well beyond reasonable doubt. This does not, however, dispose of the appeal; for he argues that as his claims were posted in Uganda, no court in Kenya has jurisdiction to...