ST.

AUGUSTINE UNIVERSITY OF TANZANIA

SCHOOL OF LAW

COURSE NAME : MOOT COURT PRACTICE I

COURSE CODE : SLW 128
TASK : GROUP ASSIGNMENT
SUBMITTED TO : MADAM MWASI MBEGU
DATE OF SUBMISSION : TUESDAY, 14 MAY 2024
SUBMITTED BY : GROUP STREAM I

NO NAMES REG NO SIGNATURE

1. CHAURA CATHERINE GEORGE LLB/2022/3946
2. MULIRO ZAIDI JUMANNE LLB/2023/1547
3. MAGANGA RUBARIGWA SALVATOR LLB/2023/4959
4. TENGA PRISCA WILLIAM LLB/2022/1220
5. TARIMO VIOLA LAWRENCE LLB/2022/4176
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

AT MWAMZA

CRIMINAL CASE NO. …….………… OF 2024

BETWEEN

REPUBLIC …………………………….PROSECUTION

VERSUS

NG’HOLO MABULA…….……................. FIRST ACCUSED

MIDDLE PERSO..........………………....... SECOND ACCUSED

MRS. MARY OTAIGO…….…………...... THIRD ACCUSED

MR. STEVE OTAIGO……………....…… FOURTH ACCUSED

MEMORIAL SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

YOUR HONOR

Here before this Honorable Court, the defendant side here in referred to as NG’HOLO
MABULA applying to this Court for the hearing of this matter as far as it is the court with
competent jurisdiction. Before this Honorable Court I stand in front of you as the Leading
Counsel ………………………………………. of the Defendant side.

1.1 STATEMENT OF FACTS

YOUR HONOR, if it pleases this court, may the defendant proceed with the material fact of the
case.

In Dar-es-salaam, the employment middle person had opening for jobs as Housemaids and
nannies in the region forged Ng’holo’s birthdate and increased her age from February 14 th 2009
to February 2nd 2004 in order to get which obtained for Ng’holo as housemaid.

On January 1st 2024, Ng’holo Mabula arrived in Dar es salaam after being shuttled from place to
place on temporary assignments.

On February 4th 2024 at Mbweni in Dar es Salaam, Ng’holo Mabula was given a permanent job
as a housemaid in the household of Steve Otaigo who worked with the TCRA. Ng’holo’s duties
as a housemaid included washing, dusting, cleaning and helping to cook in the kitchen, she also
has to look after the five-month-old son Emma Okoth.

On March 22nd 2024, Mr. Steve Otaigo and Mrs. Mary Otaigo went out in the morning leaving
the children including the baby behind. Around 12:30 pm Ng’holo Mabula went to the baby to
give him milk by a feeding bottle as this was one of her regular tasks. Suddenly something went
terribly wrong. Milk started to discharge out of the baby’s mouth and nose. Its eyes were shut.
Ng’holo was upset by this but did not know how to handle the situation. She rubbed the baby,
she tried to help the baby but the baby’s condition did not improve. A panic stricken Ng’holo
Mabula started crying. The noise brought a few of the other children into the room.
Around 1:30 pm when the Mrs. Mary Otaigo returned, the children complained to her that
Ng’holo was choking the baby. Mrs. Mary Otaigo rushed into the room and snatched the baby
within a few minutes the mother realized that her infant son “Emma Okoth” was dead. Mrs.
Mary Otaigo jumped upon Ng’holo and began assaulting Ng’holo Mabula with her fists. She
also removed her footwear and began beating the maid with them. Ng’holo Mabula fell down
and was kicked forcefully also Mr. Steve Otaigo came in and attacked Ng’holo and that caused
the Ng’holo’s nose bleed started.

1.2 ISSUES

1. Whether Ng’holo Mabula has killed Emma Okoth

2. Whether the middle person committed an offense of forgery
3. Whether Mrs. Marry Otaigo and Mr. Steve Otaigo is liable for the offense of
assault.
4. Whether Ng’holo’s parents and the middle person committed an offense of child
labor

1.3 LIST OF LAW APPLICABLE

1. THE PENAL CODE [CAP. 16 R.E 2022]

2. THE LAW OF EVIDENCE ACT [CAP. 6 R.E 2022]
3. THE LAW OF THE CHILD ACT [CAP 13 R.E 2019]
4. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA, 1977

1.4 LIST OF APPLICABLE CASES

1. R. V. CHEPE KALANGALI 1973 T.L.R. NO.77

2. GODI KASENEGALA VS REPUBLIC (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.10 OF 2008) [2010]
TZCA
3. SAID ABDALLAH v. REPUBLIC (1969) H.C.D No. 266

1.5 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CAP : Chapter
R. : Republic
HCD : High Court Divert
T.L.R : Tanzania Law Report
TZCA: Tanzania Court of Appeal

1.6 ARGUMENTS

1. Whether Ng’holo has killed the infant son Emma Okoth.

YOUR HONOR. Basing on the matter at hand before this Honorable Court as whether the
accused person Ng’holo committed the offense or attempted murder which is contrary to Section
196 of the Penal Code [CAP. 16 R.E 2022]

YOUR HONOR: on the Material Facts, on 22nd March 2024, Ng’holo accused person went to the
baby to give milk by a feeding bottle as her regular task but suddenly something went wrong.
Milk started to discharge out of the baby’s mouth and nose. Its eyes were shut. Ng’holo was
upset by this but did not know how to handle the situation. According to the fact Ng’holo had no
intention to commit murder.

YOUR HONOR: Due to the prosecution side fail to provide the efficient evidence which provide
direct that our client has committed murder because, with regard to Tanzania legal rules it is
difficult to say direct that Ng’holo has committed an offense of murder rather than our client
liable with offence of Manslaughter as provided under Section 195 of the Penal Code [CAP 16
R.E 2022] Refer to the case of R. V. CHEPE KALANGALI 1973 T.L.R. NO.77, the accused
failed to take care of the deceased child who was in his custody, and who was suffering from
cold. The resultant exposure to cold hastened the death of the deceased and he was charged for
the offense of Manslaughter.

YOUR HONOR: Through considering the fact, the prosecution side are support to prove beyond
reasonable doubt on how our client are liable for the offense of murder.

YOUR HONOR: my prayers before this Honorable Court is to made a decision by a favor on the
defendant side by considering ground and reason given in Fact.

2. Whether the middle person committed an offense of forgery.

YOUR HONOR, if it pleases this Honorable Court may allow the Counsels from Respondent
side to proceed with the second issue stated herein above “whether the middle person committed
an offence of forgery”. According to section 333 of the Penal Code, it defines a word “forgery”
to mean “making of a false document with intent to defrauder to deceive”. Regarding to this
ground, the prosecution side erred in law and in fact because failed to show clearly the age of
Ng’holo from birth certificate.

YOUR HONOR, the Prosecution side does not disclose whether the disputed birth certificate
was authorized by Mabula family and also the prosecution side did not show the model used to
forge the certificate as required per section 47 of the Law of Evidence Act [CAP 6 R.E 2022]

YOUR HOHOR, from the above explanations we pray before this honorable court to quash the
charges against the 4th accused person.

3. Whether Mrs. Mary Otaigo and Mr. Steve Otaigo are liable for the offense of
assault.

YOUR HONOR: The defendants humbly submits to this Honorable Court that Mrs. Mary Otaigo
and Mr. Steve Otaigo held liable for an offense of assault as provided under sections 240, 241,
242 and 243 of the Penal Code [CAP 16 R.E 2022] these sections clearly indicate the offense of
assault respectively, according to those sections assault is an act, which intentionally possibly,
recklessly caused another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence. The statement
of facts above has mentioned that Around 1:30 pm when the Mrs. Mary Otaigo returned, the
children complained to her that Ng’holo was choking the baby. Mrs. Mary Otaigo rushed into the
room and snatched the baby within a few minutes the mother realized that her infant son “Emma
Okoth” was dead. Mrs. Mary Otaigo jumped upon Ng’holo and began assaulting Ng’holo
Mabula with her fists. She also removed her footwear and began beating the maid with them.
Ng’holo Mabula fell down and was kicked forcefully also Mr. Steve Otaigo came in and attacked
Ng’holo Mabula and that caused the Ng’holo’s nose bleed started. Refer the case SAID
ABDALLAH v. REPUBLIC (1969) H.C.D No. 266 here the accused persons were convicted of
offense of assault and sentenced to eight months each.

YOUR HONOR: The fact that the assaulting done by Mrs. Mary Otaigo and Mr. Steve Otaigo
was excessive and unrelated to the crime, potentially violating the the accused Ng’holo Mabula’s
right as provided under Article 13(6)(b) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania,
1977 that “no person charged with criminal offense shall be treated as guilty of the offence until
proved guilty of that offence.

YOUR HONOR: from the above explanation we pray before this Honorable Court to decide that
case in favor of defendant side by considering the right of the accused person.

4. Whether Ng’holo’s parents and the middle person committed an offense of child labor

YOUR HONOR, if it pleases this Honorable Court may allow the counsels from the defendant
side to proceed with the third issue stated herein above “Whether Ng’holo’s parents and the
middle person committed an offense of child labour?”. According to Section 77(2) of the Law of
the Child Act [CAP 13 R.E 2019] stating “for the purpose of subsection (1), the minimum age
for employment or engagement of a child shall be fourteen years.” As it was also stipulated from
the relevant case of GODI KASENEGALA VS REPUBLIC (CRIMINAL APPEAL 10 OF 2008)
[2010] TZCA 5 the court held that “tender years means a child whose apparent age is not more
than fourteen years, difference between right and wrong, is justified on the same basis as the
statutory defense.” Relating to our scenario that Ng’holo is a girl aged fifteen years who declared
her own consent in demanding to engage herself to any employment available to rescue her
family from poverty, hence she is well capable and matured enough to comprehend what is right
and what is wrong. Therefore, Your Honor, Ng’holo’s parents and the middle person are liable
for the offense of forgery.

1.7 PRAYERS

In the light of the questions presented, arguments and authorities cited. The counsel for the
defendant most humbly and respectfully pray before this Honorable Court, that it may be pleased
to adjudge and declare that:

a) The accused person Ng’holo Mabula is not convicted for the offense of murder and that
she is innocent before the Court of law.
b) An order that the prosecution side shall pay appropriate monetary compensation that it
may deem fit to the accused person Ng’holo Mabula and her family.
c) The Court may grant any other provisional relief(s) as the court deems fit.

“This Honorable Court may pass any order, decree judgement to meets the end of justice”
 Respectfully submitted

………………………………………………………

[Counsel of the Defendant]