CASE RPA 0224/11 / HC / MUS

Page |1

THE MUSANZE HIGH COURT, SITTING IN MUSANZE AT ITS HEADQUARTERS,
HEARD THE CRIMINAL CASE RPA 0224/11 / HC / MUS ON APPEAL AGAINST
PROVISIONAL DETENTION AND DECIDED ON 27/08/2011 AS FOLLOWS:

PARTIES
APPELLANT: Gashugi Christian, son of Gashugi John and Mukagakwandi Christine,
born in Kanserege Cell, Gikondo Sector, Kicukiro District in Kigali city in 1981, where he
is a resident, living in Gatorwa Village, Cyabararika Cell, Muhoza Sector, Musanze
District in the Northern Province, is a Rwandan who works in the conveyor industry.
DEFENDANT: The prosecution, represented by Nkusi Faustin, a national prosecutor.

SUBJECT: Appeal against the decision of provisional detention nº 0157/011, taken by the
Musanze High Court on 07/06/2011.

II. FACTS AND PROCEDURE
[1] Gashugi Christian was arrested by the judicial police in the night of 30/05/2011 on
suspicion of raping a 14-year-old girl named Uwineza Florence. After a police
investigation the case was handed over to the prosecution for further investigation. The
prosecution requested the Musanze High Court to authorize provisional detention of
Gashugi Christian while investigation continues.
[2] After reviewing the submissions of both parties, the Musanze High Court took
decision nº 0157/011 authorizing the prosecution's investigation to continue for thirty
days while Gashugi Christian was remanded in custody. Dissatisfied with the decision,
the accused appealed to the Musanze High Court, and his complaint was recorded under
RPA 0224/11 / HC / MUS. The case involves two issues that the court must consider,
the first of which is to determine whether the statements of the deponents who have
knowledge of Gashugi Christian’s suspected crime, namely Uwineza Florence,
Ndayambaje Antoine nicknamed Gasaza and Iyamuremye Amisadab, disclose enough
reasons to suspect that Gashugi Christian is responsible for rape thus justifying his
provisional detention, and the second question is whether the report of the doctor who
examined Uwineza Florence disproves the validity of the first instance court's reasons for
suspecting that Gashugi Christian committed the crime.

Select target paragraph3