WILDLEX

The appellant was appealing against the decision of the High Court which ruled that the offence which the respondents were charged with was not an economic crime to be tried before the High Court and thus ordered that the matter to be remitted back to the trial court for necessary amendments of the charge and proceed with trial accordingly.

The appellant was found in the district of Songea to be in possession of 14 elephant tusks without a valid license following a hint provided by an informer that the appellant was going to transport the tusks. He was arrested and confessed to the charges. He was then tried and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.

The appellants were found to be in unlawful possession of elephant tusks found in the second appellant’s house and fresh and dried meat found in the first appellant’s house alleged to have been obtained from Katavi National Park. The appellants were found to be in possession of elephant meat and tusks without a valid licence.

The appellant was found in possession of 71 pieces of elephant tusks and stood trial before the district court of Shinyanga as presided over by a Resident Magistrate. The appellant appealed to the High Court but the appeal was dismissed.

The appellant was convicted by the District Court of Monduli at Monduli in absentia for unlawful possession of government trophy. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for twenty (20) years.

On the 7th day of October 2010 in Mugumu, upon information given by a secret informant the accused and one person Mosenye Barisere are suspected to be in possession of government trophies.

The appellants appeared before the District Magistrates’ Court on two charges of contravening the Nature Conservation Ordinance, 1975 relating to hunting specially protected game, (namely: three elephants) without a permit and possession of six elephant tusks.

This is an appeal by the appellant against his conviction and sentence by the Regional Court magistrate, Upington, on charges of contravention of sections 44(1)(b)(i) and 46 of the Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974.

This is an appeal case were the accused was aqutted and the convictions on the three counts of Unlawful Possession of Prescribed Trophy without a certificate of ownership were set aside for lack of proper evidence provided to the court.

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