WILDLEX

The appellants were represented in the Subordinate Court by an attorney, and according to the record, upon the charge being put to them they and their co-accused all pleaded guilty.

The appellant was found to have been complicit in the transaction where a fake rhino horn was sold in a police trap for R350 000. He was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment. The appellant unsuccessfully appealed to the Free State High Court against his conviction and sentence.

The accused were previously convicted on various counts, by the same court and the matter came for sentencing on a later date. The Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1977, prescribes a discretionary minimum sentence of 15 years imprisonment per count for amounts of more than R500 000; for the ten counts on theft of rhino horns.

Accused persons were found guilty of unlawful possession of 2 horns in contravention of the Game Act. The Act prescribes that a person found guilty of the offence must either replace the game or compensate the full value of the property to the owner or government in cases where the owner cannot be established.

The appellants were convicted own their pleas of conspiring to commit an offence of illegal hunting of a rhinoceros, and unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition in the magistrate court. They were sentenced to 5 years imprisonment each for count 1 and 4 years imprisonment each for count 3.

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 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.

An appeal against the judgement of a Magistrate Court against the accused for excessive conviction for unlawful hunting of rhinos and insufficient evidence to sustain conviction. The appeal was dismissed as lacking merit and the decision of the Magistrate Court affirmed.

This a criminal appeal against the decision of the magistrate court in terms of which the appellant was convicted of contravening s 17(2) of the Wildlife Conservation and National Parks Act 1992 (No. 28 of 1992) and was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment.