JOSEPH PARASHUKU V REPUBLIC[2013]eKLR (iv) if the accused does not agree the facts or raises any question of his guilt his reply must be recorded and change of plea entered; (v) if there is no change of plea a conviction should be recorded and a statement of the facts relevant to sentence together with the accused’s reply should be recorded.” 13. After carefully analyzing the record of the lower court, the issue that arises for determination is whether these steps were complied with. During the hearing of the appeal, the appellant reiterated the facts as given by the prosecution but added that he believed that the complainant was over 18 years of age. Of course, the appellant did not say so when responding to the facts before the trial court, but on the basis of his submissions, he asked this court to quash the conviction and set aside the sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment. 14. The appeal was opposed. Counsel for the respondent submitted that from the grounds of appeal, the appellant is only challenging the sentence and not the conviction. Counsel further submitted that 10 years’ imprisonment was the minimum sentence prescribed under the law and that in the circumstances, there are no good grounds given by the appellant to warrant this court’s interference with the said sentence. 15. I have now carefully read the lower court record and the law under which the appellant was charged. I have also carefully considered the plea as taken, and the sentence imposed upon the appellant. Two issues arise for determination:- (a) whether the plea was unequivocal and (b) whether this court should interfere with the sentence imposed upon the appellant and finally whether the relevant provisions of the law under which the appellant was charged and eventually convicted were still in the statute books by the time the charges were brought against the appellant. 16. In the 1st count the appellant was charged with child trafficking contrary to Section 13 (a) of the Sexual Offence Act No.3 of 2006. Although the above said section has been repealed by the Counter Trafficking in Persons Act No. 8 of 2010 (2nd Schedule section 5) the said Act commenced on 11th October 2012. This only means that by the time the appellant committed the above offence Section 13 (a) of the Sexual Offences Act No.3 of 2006 was still in operation. 18. Section 13 (a) of the Sexual Offences Act No.3 of 2006 states:“A person including a juristic person to who, in relation to a child. a) Knowingly or intentionally makes or organizes any travel arrangements for or on behalf of a child within or outside the borders of Kenya with the intention of facilitating the commission of any sexual offence against that child irrespective of whether the offence is committed. 19. The appellant was convicted on his own plea of guilty which was unequivocal and the prosecution summarized how he knowingly and intentionally organized travel arrangements to Tanzania with the intention of making the complainant his wife. The complainant’s age has been assessed to be between the ages of 15-17 years. Therefore she was still a child in accordance with the definition of a http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 3/4