Two judges of the Windhoek High Court have clearly set out the correct procedure to follow when a convicted person intends to appeal either the conviction or sentence.

Mandume Hafeni who was convicted in the Swakopmund Magistrate Court on two counts of theft brought an appeal within the prescribed 14 days after sentence but failed to set out the grounds for his appeal in a clear and precise manner. 

Judge Claudia Claasen who wrote the ruling with Judge Philanda Christiaan concurring, struck the appeal from the roll citing that the notice of appeal was defective. While judge Claasen said she sympathised with an appellant who is a lay litigant, a court cannot overlook a defective appeal. 

According to her, the law that governs a notice of appeal is unambiguous in that the 14-day rule is not the requirement in lodging a proper notice of appeal but also provides that such notice must be in writing and the grounds must be formulated clearly and specifically and state whether it is an error in fact or law or both.

 She said she perused the document filed which purportedly serves the purpose of notice of appeal and found that it does not comply with the law that governs the formulation of appeal grounds. As a matter of fact, she said, the document resembles a general letter with conclusions by the drafter.  That, the judge remarked, leaves the respondent (State) and the Court in the dark as to what the error the court that handled the matter committed and whether it is one of fact or law or both. 

According to her, the heads of argument, including the reference to specified sections in the legislation does alleviate the problem as the notice of appeal in the foundation for what is to follow. In the end, the judge stated, the ‘purported’ notice of appeal does not have a foundation to stand on and lacks clarity and specificality.

-rrouth@nepc.com.na