Kirby Blasts Justice Solomon
Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Monday July 31, 2017 16:51
In a judgement handed down on Friday, in a case in which a former police officer Abram Morotsi was appealing his corruption conviction by a Maun magistrate, Kirby has not spared Justice Solomon for the manner in which she handled a ‘leave to appeal’ application by Morotsi.
Solomon was the judge in the matter in which two police constables convicted for corruption, had appealed to the High Court seeking the court to reconsider the ruling passed by the Principal Magistrate in Maun. Upon hearing the appeal, Solomon dismissed it and endorsed the reasoning and findings of the trial magistrate. However, Morotsi then applied alone for leave to appeal further to the CoA.
Kirby pointed out that Justice Solomon had granted an order for leave to appeal, but failed to give reasons for that decision. He noted that this is not the first time the same judge has been criticised for this conduct, which is improper and an unhelpful approach.
“Instead of considering the matter further, as she was bound to do, the Judge simply issued an order granting leave to appeal. She gave no reasons for that decision, and failed to state upon which of the four grounds leave was granted. That is, as this court has repeatedly held, an improper and unhelpful approach. And I must add, it is not the first time that such a criticism has been directed towards Solomon J,” read the judgement.
He wrote that where a decision is made in the exercise of judicial discretion, it is essential that reasons be given, which can be considered if that exercise of discretion is later challenged.
‘Further, it is unacceptable to grant a blanket leave to appeal without specifying the issue or issues in regard to which there are reasonable prospects of success,” he said.
The CoA president gave reference of Amogelang Shimwe vs the state, an unreported criminal appeal case which he also noted Solomon was the judge.
He cautioned that the same court should not repeat these mistakes, as it puts the CoA in a tight position to reconsider the whole case, with no indication as to which aspects the judge may have found troubling.