THE State V Tawanda Mapfumo

### Preamble
1
HH 184-11
CRB 3119/10
---------


THE STATE

versus

TAWANDA MAPFUMO

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

BERE J

HARARE, 8 August 2011

BERE J: This record was placed before me with the Regional Magistrate’s comments as follows:-

“The accused was sentenced to pay a fine for US$100-00 or in default of payment 6 months imprisonment

I queried the apparent mismatch between the fine of $100-00 and the alternative term of imprisonment.

The trial magistrate concedes that the length of the alternative period of imprisonment is inordinate

The record is submitted to his/her Lordship for attention”.

I entirely agree with the views expressed by the learned Regional Magistrate though one would have thought the scrutinising Magistrate would have gone further to suggest what he perceives to be an appropriate alternative term of imprisonment. It is certainly not sufficient for one to take comfort in criticising the approach adopted without proffering a possible solution.

It should be noted that there is no mathematical formula that can be invoked to compute the possible alternative period of imprisonment where one has been granted the benefit of paying a fine. It is a question of value judgment deriving mainly from the indications made by the accused person during mitigation of sentence.

It is at that stage of mitigation that the court should make an effort to ascertain how long the convicted person would require to raise the amount imposed as a fine. The court can then use its wide discretion to come up with a possible alternative period of imprisonment.

The mitigation in the instant case is too scant to be of much assistance to the court but using the court’s wide discretion I would estimate that perhaps the appropriate alternative period of suspension would be one month.

Accordingly the imposed sentence is altered to read as follows:-

“The accused is to pay $100-00 or in default of payment to undergo 1 month imprisonment”.

BERE J: ……………………………………

MUSAKWA J: agree ……………………….