Well founded grounds for State opposition to bail (Zimbabwe)

From Criminal Defense Wiki
Revision as of 14:55, 28 May 2010 by Ddemetriou (talk | contribs) (Created page with 'It was made quite clear in Hussey 1991 (2) ZLR 187 (S) that where the State seeks to rely on one or more of these grounds when opposing bail, it is insufficient for the State mer�')
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

It was made quite clear in Hussey 1991 (2) ZLR 187 (S) that where the State seeks to rely on one or more of these grounds when opposing bail, it is insufficient for the State merely to make bald assertions that the particular grounds applied. Its assertions must be well-grounded. It must produce cogent reasons why the particular ground in question applies and these reasons must be supported by proper information. In Malumjwa HB-34-03 it was held that in bail applications the court has to strike a balance between the interest of society (that the applicant should stand trial and there should be no interference with the administration of justice) and the liberty of an accused person (who pending the outcome of his trial is presumed to be innocent). The likelihood of a lengthy prison term being imposed (i.e. the seriousness of the offence) is a factor to be taken into account in assessing the risk of absconding. Where is has been shown that the accused has interfered with evidence, the court is justified in denying him bail. The court should, however, not refuse bail on the bare assertion of the State; there must be enough reason for such a conclusion. In other words, grounds for refusal of bail should be reasonably substantiated.

Zimbabwe Criminal Defense Manual

Table of Contents Introduction Defense Lawyer's Role and Responsibilities Pre-Trial Matters Jurisdiction of Courts Preparing for Trial Trials Rules of Evidence Criminal Law Code Verdict Sentence Record of Proceedings Appeals Automatic Review and Scrutiny Miscellaneous Matters