rape, stating that it was only upon his arrival that his companions informed him that they had forced sexual intercourse with the victim; Whereas, according to article 131-4 of the Penal Code, "is an accomplice to an action qualified as a crime or misdemeanour, anyone who has knowledge of an attempted crime or already committed does not, while it was still possible to prevent or limit its effects or when it was thought that the culprits or one of them would commit new crimes that a denunciation can prevent, immediately notified the administrative or judicial authorities”. Whereas it has already been demonstrated that rape occurred; whereas O.I had knowledge of this crime and did not denounce it to the authorities; better yet, he took an active part in humiliating the victim since he was the one who brandished the victim's underpants with a dagger and started filming; that he continued filming the action in which his companions forced the victim to wash her blood-stained loincloth and the other action in which they beat her, tore her clothes while she was trying to flee; that it is still O.I who told the rescuer to go back home under the pretext that nothing abnormal was happening; That the charges of rape for which O.I. is accused should be reclassified as complicity in rape and that he should be found guilty of it; 2- Sentence Whereas according to article 533-10 of the Penal Code, "accomplices to a crime or misdemeanour are punished as the perpetrators of the crime or misdemeanour unless the law provides otherwise. Rape is punishable by imprisonment for 7 (seven) to 10 (ten) years and a fine of CFAF 600,000 (six hundred thousand) to CFAF 2,000,000 (two million)”; Whereas O.I. has acted with discernment in view of the fact that, through his behaviour, he condoned the rape committed by his companions and that he himself filmed the circumstances subsequent to this crime; whereas it should be noted that the violence of a certain barbarity that followed the rape reveals the dangerous personality of O.I.; whereas, 5