WILDLEX

The court held that as an observer PW1 (a game scout) could only testify to the fact that the demarcated lines were ”cut” but not to whether they conformed with the Statutiry instrument. Thus PW1’s evidence is that of hearsay and inadmissible.

This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence of a fine of P100 passed by the Chief Magistrate at Francistown on 8th April, 1982 on a charge of failing to report a Government trophy contrary to section 82 (1) as read with section 82 (2) of the Fauna Conservation Act Cap 38:01 as amended by Act No. I of 1979.

The appellant was convicted by a magistrate of the offence of unlawful possession of government trophy contrary to section 82 (1) and (2) (b) of the Fauna Conservation Act (Cap. 38:01) (1973 Rev.).

The accused were charged with contravening Regulation 5 (1) of the Fauna Conservation (Batawana Tribal Territory) (Hunting) Regulations, 1967, contained in Statutory Instrument No. 65 of 1967. They killed two buffalo without being in possession of a permit allowing them to do so.

The court held that if it is established that the appellant hunted and killed the animals in the game reserve, the burden shifts to the appellant to establish that he did not know that he was in the game reserve. The appellant thus has to establish on a balance of probabilities that he killed the animals on another piece of land.

This Appeal on the Court of Appeal, Lobatse was against an order, granted by the trial magistrate court, forfeiting to the State a vehicle which was used by the appellant in hunting game, without a permit. The appellant argued that at the time of the offence the vehicle belonged to the bank which borrowed him the money to buy the vehicle.

The appellants were convicted of hunting game animals without a licence contrary to section 15(1) as read with section 15(2)(b) of the Fauna Conservation Act by the senior magistrate, Francistown, on 23 July 1985 and each were fined P150 and sentenced to six months' imprisonment which was conditionally suspended.

This was an appeal against his conviction and sentences in the High Court. The appellant was convicted by the Magistrate's Court at Maun of unlawful possession of Government trophies, namely 12 elephant tusks, contrary to section 82(2) of the Fauna Conservation Act (Cap. 38:01) (1973 Rev.).

The accused were charged and convicted of contravening section 15 (1) of the Fauna Conservation Act. The first appellant killed three kudus whereas his licence only permitted him to hunt for two springboks.