usually comes to collect money from the girls “after service”; that payments made were recorded in a ledger for that purpose (exhibit no. 2020-005 of 18 February 2020); that this actually acts as sharing of proceeds of prostitution; that besides, S.O took C.R into his house to help his wife; that he encouraged C into prostitution in that, according to him, it was going to help her pay her transport back to Nigeria; that this was how he proceeded to collect money from the victim; that these actions by Solomon and his mother stand as material evidence of pimping; that this element characterizing the offence stands against them; Whereas thirdly, for the offence to be established, there should be premeditation; that this implies fully knowing one is favouring someone else’s prostitution and drawing profit thereof; that as it is, S.O and his mother U.F had cognisance of the prostitution which had been going on in that they made houses (brothels) available to the girls for this purpose; that they freely favoured this prostitution and partook of the proceeds thereof; that being mentally sound, they cannot claim to have ignored the reprehensible character of their actions; that it would be proper to establish that they violated the moral prescription of the law; that in a nutshell, the fact of pimping have been established against them; that it would be appropriate to find them guilty; 2- SENTENCE Whereas according to article 533(23) pimping is punishable by three to ten years’ imprisonment and a CFA F 1,000,000 (one million) to CFA F 6,000,000 (six million) fine; that according to article 615(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code “Where a person is convicted for the first time for a crime or common law offence, court and tribunals can order by the judgement convicting him and on grounded motives that part or the whole sentence will be a suspended sentence”.