DPP v Labavarde

• Jurisdiction: Mauricio
• Date: 09 March 1965
• Court: High Court (Mauritius)

Mauritius, High Court.

(Sir Rampersad Neerunjun C.J. and Ramphul Ag. J.)

Director of Public Prosecutions

and

Labavarde and Anor.

THE INDIVIDUAL IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The individual in international law Human rights and freedoms Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950 Presumption of innocence The law of Mauritius.

Summary: The facts.The respondents were prosecuted in the District Court of Pamplemousses on the charge of having wilfully and unlawfully removed wood from Crown Land without the written permission of the Conservator of Forests. The prosecution adduced no evidence to prove one of the elements of the offence, namely that the land from which the wood was removed was Crown Land, and the Magistrate consequently dismissed the information. The Director of Public Prosecutions appealed from the decision of the Magistrate on the ground that the information lodged by the Forest Officer constituted prima facie evidence of the guilt of the accused and that it was not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the land from which the wood was removed was Crown Land. The Director of Public Prosecutions relied on the argument that the information laid against the respondents charged them under the Crown Lands (Amendment) Ordinance, 1946, which formed part of the Forest, Mountain and River Reserves Ordinance, and that section 44 of the latter Ordinance provided that in any prosecution under it, the information on oath of any Forest Officer shall be deemed to be prima facie evidence of the guilt of the person charged.

Held: that the appeal must be dismissed. The section invoked was repugnant to section 8 (2) of the Mauritius (Constitution) Order, 1964, which provided for the protection of the fundamental human right that every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty.

The following is the text of the judgment:

Sir Rampersad Neerunjun C.J.: The respondents were prosecuted before the district court of Pamplemousses on an information charging them with having wilfully and unlawfully removed wood from a Crown land without the written permission of the Conservator of Forests. The prosecution adduced no evidence to prove one of the elements of the offence, viz. that the land from which the wood was removed was Crown land, and the magistrate consequently dismissed the information. The Director of...