Zimbabwe: Man Saved From 9-Year Mandatory Sentence for Possession of Python Skin, Fat

A Masvingo man has been rescued from serving a nine-year mandatory sentence following his conviction for unlawful possession of python skin.

Philip Dzokurasa was already serving a nine-year jail term when he was rescued by Masvingo High Court judge, Justice Zisengwe who quashed his sentence ruling that the lower court erred in giving him the sentencing.

Dzokurasa was convicted in the Magistrates court for the offence of unlawful possession of the trophy of a specially protected animal in contravention of s45 (1) as read with s 128 (1)(b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act [Chapter 20:14] ("the Act").

He candidly admitted to having been found by some game rangers in possession of a python skin and some python "fat" which he kept stored in a sack in his bedroom.

Upon his conviction, the accused was sentenced to 9 years imprisonment ostensibly based on that sentence being the mandatory minimum sentence provided under the Act.

The singling out of some of these specially protected animals as deserving greater protection than the rest may be due to a variety of reasons; for example, they may be at greater risk of extinction due to certain human practices such as poaching which targets them or due to some environmental or ecological factors or considerations.

These are the animals that find their way into the Statutory Instrument referred to earlier.

Zisengwe said the python is conspicuous by its absence from that list and the latin maxim expressio unius, est exclusio alterius (the expression of one is the exclusion of others) finds particular application here.

"Reference in the charge, therefore to s128 of the Act was erroneous and stands to be expunged therefrom.

"The situation in the present matter is not unprecedented.

"Ultimately therefore, as things presently stand, the mandatory minimum sentence provided for in s128 of the Act does not apply to the hunting or possession of pythons or the possession of any trophy thereof."

He ruled, "Consequently, the sentence imposed in the present matter was based on a wrong interpretation of the Act and cannot stand.

"The accused should have been sentenced in terms of s45 of the Act.

"This court, subject to the limitations imposed under s45 of the Act, is at liberty to substitute the sentence imposed by the trial court with an appropriate one, suffice it to say that the offence for which the accused was convicted cannot be trivialised."

The judge said it remains a serious offence given the incessant killing of pythons, not infrequently under the guise of that reptile's purported supernatural powers.

"I hold the view that a sentence which meets the justice of the case is one of 2 years' imprisonment.

"Accordingly, the conviction is hereby confirmed, subject to the deletion of any reference to s128 of the Parks and Wildlife Act, [Chapter 20:14] in the charge.

"The sentence imposed is hereby set aside and substituted with two years' imprisonment," said the judge ordering that the accused be brought before the court without any undue delay to be informed of the alteration of his sentence on review.

Read the original article on New Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe: Man Saved From 9-Year Mandatory Sentence for Possession of Python Skin, Fat

Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters

Success!

Error!

Error!