By Lauryne Akoth
Lady Justice Grace Nzioka handed Jowie the Death Penalty on Wednesday 13th March, 2024. Her verdict has come as a shock to several seeing as the death penalty was declared unconstitutional in Kenya.
In a landmark ruling in the year 2017, the Supreme Court declared the death penalty unconstitutional leading to the creation of a task force to review the penalty. Notably, no death executions have taken place in Kenya since 1987.
Presidents Mwai Kibaki in 2009 and Uhuru Kenyatta in 2016 changed the sentences of all death row prisoners to life imprisonment.
Despite quoting from the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights that states every human being has a right to life, Lady Justice Nzioka noted that international instruments that speak to human rights acknowledge instances whereby the death penalty may be inevitable.
“In countries that have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed for the most serious of crimes by the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime and according to a final judgment rendered by a competent court.” Quoted Justice Nzioka.
She also mentioned the African Charter of Human and People’s Rights, highlighting that Jowie violated the Charter by taking Monicah Kimani’s life. She emphasized that the Supreme Court permits the death penalty for the gravest offences.
Regarding whether Jowie’s case justified the imposition of the death penalty, Justice Nzioka examined various factors, including the evidence presented in court. She observed that the brutality of Monicah’s murder indicated the perpetrator was highly skilled and not an amateur.
The report by the probation Department indicating that Jowie was trained as a security personnel by the Dubai Police Academy further corroborated the findings of the investigation.
The judge also took into account submissions by the prosecution, Monica’s family as well as the defence (Jowie’s legal team). She particularly emphasized 2 aspects; Jowie’s sentiments on the submissions in mitigation by his defense counsel as well as how the defense described the murder.
She noted the defence described the murder as a tragic loss of life on extreme circumstances bordering on an act of absolute madness that is beyond understanding underscoring the gruesomeness of the murder.
She also noted that Jowie failed to take ownership of the crime since in his plea to the court, he contended that he contended that although Monicah’s family advocated for the death penalty, her father publicly stated that he would not seek vengeance.
Justice Nzioka additionally stated that she took into account the impact of the offence on the accused’s family, noting that Monicah’s mother experienced depression and suffered a stroke, while their family business collapsed since Monicah’s death as she was the managing director.
The probation officer’s statement regarding Jowie served as conclusive evidence against him, as the judge also evaluated his character based on the collected evidence. According to the probation officer, Jowie was described as lacking stable partner relationships, displaying antisocial personality traits by living on the edge, being impulsive and thrill-seeking, and exhibiting a dual personality trait.
The final nail struck on the coffin that is Jowie’s judgment were the aggravating factors in the case including the brutality of the murder, the murder weapon, the intricate planning of the murder, physiological and physical harm to the victim, and the victim’s family, an attempt to conceal evidence, lack of provocation from the deceased as well as the fact that the murder was premeditated and not in self-defence.
The above contributed to the disregard of a non-custodial sentence and eventually, the death sentence for the accused.