Arusha. Komanya Makoye, who was challenging a 30-year prison sentence for rape on the grounds that the Musoma District Court denied him a Sukuma language interpreter because he did not understand Swahili, has lost his appeal.
High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo found that the trial records clearly showed the appellant responded to all charges in Swahili without indicating any difficulty in following the proceedings.
The court observed that Makoye questioned witnesses in Swahili, mounted his defence and answered all questions without any sign that he failed to understand what was happening in court.
High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo also rejected Makoye’s assertion that the case stemmed from a debt dispute of Sh2 million between himself and the victim’s father. The judge noted that this defence had been considered by the District Court but raised no reasonable doubt against the prosecution’s evidence linking him to the rape.
The ruling was delivered on July 13, 2026 by High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo at the Musoma Sub-Registry while determining the appeal against the sentence handed down by the Musoma District Court.
In his judgment, High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo upheld the 30-year prison term for rape but acquitted Makoye of the charge of impregnating a Mugango Secondary School student and set aside the accompanying five-year sentence, having found that the allegation had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The original case
According to evidence presented in the District Court, between January and September 2025 in Kwibara Village, Musoma District in Mara Region, Makoye allegedly had sexual intercourse on several occasions with a 16-year-old schoolgirl, who was later found to be pregnant.
Following his conviction, the District Court sentenced him to 30 years’ imprisonment for rape and five years for impregnating the student, with the sentences to run concurrently.
The appeal
Dissatisfied with the sentence, Makoye lodged an appeal citing seven grounds. These included claims that he had been convicted on the uncorroborated evidence of the victim, there were contradictions in the prosecution witnesses’ testimony, the case arose from a Sh2 million debt dispute, there was no DNA evidence linking him to the pregnancy, and that he had been denied a Sukuma interpreter.
Court’s decision
After hearing arguments from both sides and reviewing the record, High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo stated that a first appellate court has a duty to re-evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusion. He emphasised that in criminal cases, the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The court found the victim’s evidence to be credible and corroborated by medical evidence from the doctor who examined her and submitted Police Form No. 3 (PF3).
High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo noted that testimony from the victim’s father, together with the girl’s own account, confirmed she was 16 years old at the time of the incidents, thereby satisfying a key element of the offence of defilement of a child under 18.
The court pointed out that the law allows a court to rely on the evidence of a victim of a sexual offence even without corroboration, provided the court is satisfied that the testimony is truthful and reliable.
High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo observed that the victim gave a detailed account of how she was lured into the relationship, the locations where they met, and the times they had sexual intercourse. Makoye failed to challenge this evidence effectively through cross-examination during the trial.
In light of this, the court was satisfied that the prosecution had proved the rape charge beyond reasonable doubt and therefore upheld the 30-year sentence imposed by the District Court.
However, regarding the charge of impregnating the student, the court ruled that although it was established that the victim was a Form One student at Mugango Secondary School and was one month pregnant, the evidence was insufficient to prove that Makoye was responsible for the pregnancy.
High Court Judge Kamazima Kafanabo stated that since Makoye denied responsibility for the pregnancy, the prosecution was required to produce scientific DNA evidence or other compelling proof linking the accused to it, something that was not done.
“In the circumstances of this case, the charge of impregnating the student has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt,” the judgment read in part.
Consequently, the court acquitted Makoye of the impregnation charge and set aside the five-year sentence, but ordered him to continue serving the 30-year term for rape.
Register to begin your journey to our premium contentSubscribe for full access to premium content
