Samwel Kiberenge v Republic [2013] eKLR We are, for those reasons, of the view that there was sufficient and sound evidence to establish the charge against the appellant. On whether the delay in taking the appellant to court invalidated the charge, we reiterate what this Court said in the case of JULIUS KAMAU MBUGUA V R, [2010] eKLR 37: “The alleged unlawful detention does not exonerate the appellant from the serious crime he is alleged to have committed. The breach could logically give rise to a civil remedy – money compensation as stipulated in Section 72 (6) of the former Constitution. That is the appropriate remedy which the appellant should have sought in a different forum.” In the instant appeal, the record shows that the total hours spent in police custody was slightly over twenty four [24] hours. The breach could logically give rise to a civil remedy which the appellant can seek in a different forum. Finally, on the issue of whether the sentence was enhanced lawfully, the only sentence available for a charge under section 8 (1) (2) of the Sexual Offences Act, No. 3 of 2006 is life-imprisonment. The Sexual Offences Act No. 3 of 2006 provides that: “8 (1) A person who commits an act which causes penetration with a child is guilty of an offence termed defilement. (2) A person who commits an offence of defilement with a child aged eleven years or less shall upon conviction be sentenced to imprisonment for life.” Emphasis supplied. The Sexual Offences Act provides for minimum sentences and Parliament gives no discretion to the courts to impose sentences below those specified as minimum. This is in tandem with the main objective of the Act which is “prevention and protection of all persons from harm from unlawful sexual acts”. A reading of Section 8 (2) clearly shows that the only sentence provided for a person who commits defilement of a child aged eleven years and below is life imprisonment. Once there is proof that a child is eleven years and below, the mandatory sentence is life imprisonment. In the instant appeal, the age of PW 1 was unequivocally proven as ten years from her birth certificate which was admitted in evidence. This Court is guided by the case of JOSEPH KIPLIMO V R, CR NO. 416 OF 2010, where this Court stated as regards Section 8 (2) of the Sexual Offences Act: “This provision apparently provides only one sentence for a person who commits an offence of defilement with a child aged below eleven years and further that that sentence of life sentence is mandatory. Section 8 (3) states that a person who commits the same offence but with a child between the ages of twelve and fifteen years is liable, upon conviction to imprisonment for a term not less than twenty years whereas Section 8 (4) sets out a sentence not less than fifteen years for one convicted of the same offence where the victim is between the ages of sixteen and eighteen. In short, for the offender where the victim is above eleven years, the court has discretion to decide on the sentence albeit the sentence cannot be below either fifteen years or twenty years. But for the same offence with http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 6/8