A critical Analysis of the Law Governing Admissability of Confession in the Law of Evidence in Zambia and The Nature and Extent of Torture involved

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Date
2013-03-15
Authors
Mungala, Peter Andrew
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
This essay recognises that torture is expressly outlawed and is illegal under Zambian law. Despite it being illegal it is widely practiced by the law enforcement officers on the accused person in a bid to obtain incriminating statements from them. The essay proceeds to advance arguments that the law enforcement agents and other scholars have forwarded to justify torture; on the other hand the essay outlines the reasons that have been outlined by the human rights activists as well as other scholars against the use of torture to extract incriminating statements. The essay brings out the fact that the nature of torture inflicted on the victims is diverse and extent of torture inflicted on the accused persons range from the victims sustaining mere physical injuries to death in certain instances. The essay discusses the admissibility of confessions under Common Law. Under Common Law in order for a confession to be admissible as evidence it is important that the judge satisfies the provisions of the Judges' Rules regarding admissibility of confessions. The essay will examine admissibility of confessions in Zambia and the steps and guidelines that the Supreme Court of Zambia has on several occasions given to the lower Courts. Despite the Supreme Court having offered clear guidance on what approach to be followed before a confession is admissible as evidence, the lower Courts have in certain instances failed to adhere to the guidelines given by the Supreme Court. The essay will proceed to give recommendations to the legislature and the courts to ensure that such deficiencies in the law are rectified.
Description
Keywords
Evidence(law)--Zambia , Admissable evidence--Zambia , Confession(law)--Zambia
Citation
Collections