REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA, MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK
REVIEW JUDGMENT
PRACTICE DIRECTION 61
Case Title: The State Versus Downey Aprils and 2 Others Accused | Case No: CR 4/2025 | |
High Court MD Review No: 1957/2024 | Division of Court: High Court, Main Division | |
Coram: Christiaan J et Claasen J | Delivered on: 28 January 2025 | |
Neutral citation: S v Aprils and 2 Others (CR 4/2025) [2025] NAHCMD 15 (28 January 2025) | ||
ORDER:
| ||
REASONS FOR ORDER: | ||
CHRISTIAAN J (CLAASEN J concurring): [1] The accused, in the Magistrates’ Court for the district of Karibib, held at Usakos, was convicted of contempt of court and sentenced to six (6) months’ imprisonment. The matter was sent on review with a statement by the magistrate who dealt with the matter, setting out the grounds and reasons for the proceedings on which she found the accused guilty of contempt of court. The magistrate further indicated that she noticed that she imposed an incompetent sentence which exceeds the penalty clause and suggests that the sentence be set aside and that the accused be sentenced to three (3) months’ direct imprisonment. [2] Based on the learned magistrate’s statement, this court finds the conviction to be in order. The sentence, as conceded to by the magistrate, is in excess of the penalty provided for in section 108(1) of the Magistrates’ Court Act 32 of 1944, being ‘. . . a fine not exceeding one hundred Namibia Dollar or in default of payment, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months or to such imprisonment without the option of a fine.’ [3] The magistrate’s suggestion remains a term of imprisonment, without the option of a fine. Considering the circumstances of the case, the fact that the accused was in custody on another matter at the time of the conviction, the magistrate’s initial sentence of direct imprisonment and the penalty clause allowing direct imprisonment, the court will not deviate from that. [4] As a result, it is ordered that:
| ||
P CHRISTIAAN JUDGE | C CLAASEN JUDGE | |