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. First appellant contended that he had obtained licences from his relatives to hunt and had endeavoured to have them endorsed in terms of the regulations in Statutory Instrument No. 6 of 1969 which provided for the endorsement by a game warden. The appellants were therefore under the impression that the endorsements permitted them to hunt. Counsel for the appellant argued that his clients were not criminally liable as section 11 (1) of the Penal code protected them. The Appeal Court upheld the magistrates decision and dismissed the appeal.
Country
Court
Type of court
Court jurisdiction
Date of opinion
1978
Abstract
Language of document
English
Reference number
1978 BLR 28 (HC)
Species
Transnational
No
Decision
The argument that the accused persons were bonafide in believing that the endorsements they had, allowed them to hunt and therefore section 11 (1) of the Penal Code protected them, was flawed. Section 7 (1) of the Fauna Conservation Act imported strict liability therefore section 11 (1) was excluded and could not operate. Mens rea was not a necessary ingredient of the offence.
Appealed
Yes