With regard to the juvenile child Yahya Abdullah Al Doma, it was established from the Defence exhibit (1) that he has not yet entered adulthood. So, we are in the opinion of upholding the arrangement issued as against him. Kassim Hamid Hussain Kassim Supreme Court Judge 18/02/2018 Second Opinion: Child Act for 2010 is a specific law which restricts the common law. The Child Act was enacted in accordance with the United Nations Convention which Sudan has signed and ratified. Such convention is considered to be incorporated in Sudan legislation. Article (6/1/3/4) of the Act on Interpretation of Common Laws and Provisions for 1974 provides that ((the provisions of any law shall be interpreted in the manner that will achieve the purpose for which it has been enacted. In all events, the interpretation which achieves this purpose alike shall be preferable) and that ((the provisions of the subsequent law shall prevail over the preceding law to the extent which will remove such contradiction and considers any specific law or provision in respect of any issue. The Child Act of 2010 relates to the child which is enacted and legislated in respect of the young who has not yet attained adulthood (a criminal or victim). At the same time, it is the law following the Criminal Act for 1991. So, in accordance with the legal interpretation of the rules of construction, the provisions of Article (4) relating to the young who has not yet attained adulthood shall prevail over the provision of Article (3) of the Criminal Act for 1991, because it is excluded from the provisions thereof. Article (3) of the Child Act for 2010 provides a prevalence of provisions of law stating that the provisions of law prevail over any provision in any other law which is in contradiction therewith. In accordance with the provision of Article (3) of Judgment Rules Law for 1983, the legislative provisions of conclusive evidence may not be interpreted because, interpretive judgment may not exist with the explicitly of the provision. The provision of Article (4) of the Child Act 2010 is explicit and of conclusive evidence that a non-adult child one who has not exceeded 18 years of his age. Therefore, there is neither a requirement nor a justification for recoursing to the Criminal Act because the Child Act defines the adult child, as having exceeded 18 years of age. The National Supreme Court has undertaken this approach and adopted it in many of its judgment including but not limited to: Government of Sudan versus Ishaq Zakareya Abdullah 446/2013 unpublished It adjudicated that (the governing law is the Child Act for 2010 and therefore the death penalty may not be imposed on whoever has not attained 18 years of his age)