WILDLEX

The applicant appealed the matter in the Supreme Court of Zambia challenging the order by the Surbodinate Court for forfeiture on the grounds that Phiri was not the owner of the firearm, and that for such order to be made where the property involved belonged not to the person convicted but to an innocent third party, it must be shown that the th

The accussed was fined a sum of K5000 or 9 months’ simple imprisonment in default of the fine. To review this matter, the court referred to ss 337 and 338 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This court reasoned that there were two kinds of trophies involved that had been placed under one charge sheet.

The appellant was convicted of being in possession of rhino horns without a certificate of ownership. The appeallant appealed the conviction.

The appellants in the court below were found to be hunting game animals without a licence. The appellants plead guilty to the offence and were convicted on 2 counts of the offence of unlawful possession of government trophy contrary to Section 100 (1) and Section 135 of the Zambia Wildlife Authority Act, 12 of 1998.

This was an appeal against the decision of the Magistrate’s court to convict and sentence the appellants for unlawful Possession of Prescribed Trophy Contrary to section 130(2) (a) and 86 of the Zambia Wildlife Act.

The accused had been found in possession of a firearm without a license in contravention of the National Parks and Wildlife Act, (Cap. 316) s. 145 (1) and the Firearms Act, (Cap.111) s. 54 (2) and with the intention of hunting game illegally.

A licensed hunter instructed his servant to kill an elephant, and left the servant in charge of the trophy. The Court held that this did not make the servant guilty of being in the possession of a trophy without a licence.

Dismissed appeal for lack of Merit- An appeal by the Appellant namely Pagainst the conviction on his own admission by the Magistrate of the Subordinate Court of the first class sitting on grounds that the charge did not disclose the full ingredients of the offence and that the plea of guilt being enter by the accused was equivocal and improper.

This is an Appeal against the Ruling of the High Court, dated the 12th of May, 2008 where the trial Judge refused the Appellant’s application for leave to apply for Judicial Review.