Embattled Edouard Bamporiki recently took to Twitter to admit that he was involved in a corruption case.
Through his Twitter handle, Bamporiki — the former State Minister of Youth and Culture — also pleaded with President Paul Kagame to pardon him.
His appeal attracted a mixture of public outrage and sympathy, in varying measures. Some have raised questions revolving around the legal implications of publicly admitting to a crime.
Innocent Muramira, a lawyer, told The New Times that pleading guilty on social media or before the court, in general, helps the suspect in various ways, including easing the time and the process of the investigation which are going to be spent on that case, among others.
Muramira further explains that in most cases, when the defendant is looking for mitigating factors to their cases, they admit the crimes.
For instance, when they are requesting a lesser penalty they might say they never wasted court time, they plead guilty and they have been cooperative with the investigators as well as submitted every document they wanted, he added
“All that helps when one is trying to look for mitigating factors that can ease the punishment and under the Rwandan law when you pledged guilty most of the time there is a chance to be given half of the sentence you’re supposed to serve,” he said
Moreover, he pointed out that most of those people would like to use such provisions also for them to request a suspended sentence.
In addition, he said that, however, the mitigating factors are only decided by the judges, not the court of public opinion.
What does the law say?
Article 59 of the law determines offences and penalties, in general, states that certain mitigating circumstances are decided by a judge and they may reduce penalties, especially when:
“The accused, before the commencement of prosecution pleads guilty and sincerely seeks forgiveness from the victim and the Rwandan society and expresses remorse and repairs the damage caused as much as would be expected from them;” read part of the article
In addition, the judge mitigates or reduces the sentence when the accused turns into competent judicial authority before or during the pre-trial proceedings.
“At the outset of the trial in the first instance, the accused pleads guilty by a sincere confession;” it adds
Furthermore, the judge assesses if the offence has minor consequences.
While Article 60 states the reduction of penalties in cases of mitigating circumstances decided by a judge if there are mitigating circumstances, penalties may be reduced as follows:
“Subject to the provisions of Article 107 life imprisonment may be reduced but it cannot be less than 25 years,” it says adding; ” If fixed-term imprisonment or a fine may be reduced but it cannot be less than the According to the minimum sentence provided for the offence committed.”