A former police officer, convicted of raping his daughter, has failed in his bid to appeal both his conviction and sentence.

The accused was sentenced to an effective 25 years in prison by Windhoek High Court Judge Claudia Claasen.

Judge Claasen dismissed the application by the 54-year-old man, who cannot be named to protect the identity of the victim.

The judge had sentenced him to 18 years for rape and seven years for incest.

Judge Claasen described rape as one of the “most atrocious, degrading and invasive acts that one human being can commit against another.”

She said that such sexual offences fall into a category of violations that can never be fully addressed, regardless of the sentence imposed.

The accused had argued that the complainant, a single witness, was not credible.

He claimed that the court misdirected itself in finding her testimony trustworthy.

He pointed to contradictions in her evidence and the fact that she had withdrawn the criminal case against her father several times.

Judge Claasen, however, stated that she had considered the evidence in its totality and found the complainant’s testimony regarding the incidents forming the basis of the two charges to be clear and satisfactory in all material respects. She noted that the withdrawals were reasonable, given the circumstances and context of the matter.

The judge added that there was some corroboration that the accused raped his daughter during a family outing at Jakkalputz.

The victim was 15 years old at the time.

Judge Claasen cited a witness who recalled the complainant saying: “My father made me his wife”.

The judge rejected the argument that the complainant omitted information from her police statements.

She noted that a statement is merely the “skeleton”, with the “flesh” provided in court – a well-established principle in criminal law.

Regarding the appeal against the sentence, Judge Claasen said an appeal court has limited power to interfere, as sentencing is the prerogative of the trial court.

She emphasised that the appeal court should not override a sentence simply because it might have imposed a different term.

Ultimately, Judge Claasen said that there was no prospect of the appeal court reaching another conclusion or imposing a different sentence.

The accused was represented by Joseph Andreas on the instructions of Legal Aid.

The State was represented by Palmer Khumalo.

– rrouth@nepc.com.na