Traditional healer from Mpanda, Barnaba Changalo, is to remain behind bars for 30 years for raping a primary school girl.
This followed a decision by the Court of Appeal to dismiss the appeal in part under which Changalo, the appellant, had lodged against the judgment given by the High Court, which confirmed his conviction of the offence by the trial district court.
Justices Shaban Lila, Winfrida Korosso and Lugano Mwandambo upheld the conviction of the appellant of rape but reduced the life imprisonment sentence imposed on him to 30 years custodian sentence.
During hearing of the appeal, the appellant had contended that the trial court did not conduct voire dire examination properly to establish the competency of the child of tender age whether he or she was capable of testifying, a mistake which was also not observed by the High Court.
In their deliberations, the justices of the appeal court, the highest temple of justice in Tanzania, noted from the records that the trial magistrate posed questions to the victim who was presented as a child aged seven years.
Carefully examined, they noted that the questions posed tested both her competence to understand and give rational answers to questions posed as well as her understanding of the nature of an oath and the duty of speaking the truth.
The justices said that the trial magistrate made inquiry to the victim and found she was capable of understanding questions asked and giving rational answers but he was of the view that she did not understand the nature of an oath, hence becoming the competent witness.
“Consequently, and rightly so, the learned trial magistrate permitted her to testify not on oath. That said, we entirely agree with the state attorney that the appellant’s complaint that the conduct of voire dire test is wanting, is without merit and we accordingly dismiss it,” they ruled.
The appellant also complained that the trial court did not analyze and evaluate the prosecution evidence against that of the defence before discounting his testimony that the case was framed up.
After going through the records, the justices further noted that the trial magistrate dealt with the evidence of both sides and analyzed and evaluated the evidence and was inclined to discount the appellant’s contention that the case was framed up one, thus, that was sufficient.
Before penning down, the justices looked into the sentence imposed on the appellant of life imprisonment by the trial court, a punishment which is meted out to a person upon conviction of rape to a girl of less than ten years of age.
They noted that the age of the victim was not certain, a position which the justices decided to resolve the same in favour of the appellant and proceeded to quash the life imprisonment sentence and substitute for it with thirty years imprisonment.
On October 26, 2014, the appellant, a traditional healer, visited the house of a certain ailing mother (name withheld) in which she stayed with the victim of rape and another person. Apparently, the appellant was well received and spent a night in the house.
The following morning (October 27, 2014) the guy who was staying with the sick mother left for the farm while the victim (girl) went to school.
As she was sick, the mother remained at home and was given medicine by the appellant who spent the day there. Later that day, the girl returned home from school but in the evening the appellant dragged her into the bathroom where he committed the offence.
The guy reported the matter to the mother, who with the help of someone, took the appellant to the police station.