R. v. Chamba Magina, Crim. Rev. 112-M-66; 1/3/67; Platt, J

R. v. Chamba Magina, Crim. Rev. 112-M-66; 1/3/67; Platt, J

Accused were convicted of unlawful possession of a government trophy (Fauna Conservation Ordinance, Cap. 302, ss. 49 (1), 53) after pleading to being in possession of giraffe meat without permission.

            Held: (1) The definition of the term “trophy” in section 2 of the ordinance does not include animal meat because meat is not durable portion of the animal. Citing Yahya Saidi v. Reg., Crim. App. 666 of 1961; Abdulla Libengyile v. R., Crim. Rev. 3 of 1963. (2) Similarly, the definition of Government tropics in section 47(1) ,with the exception of part (b) thereof, excludes animal meat. Parts (a) and (c) or section 47(1), which deal with game animals which have been killed or capture, do to denominate meat as a Government trophy. (3) However, part (b) of section 47(1), which deals with animals which have been found dead, provides that a government trophy includes the animal and the trophy of any such animal “or any part of any game animal which is found. “Thus, if part (b) is applicable, the meat of a game animal is a government trophy. Citing R. v. Mohamedi Musa, Crim. Rev. 79 of the accused came within part (b) of section 47 (1), the convictions were quashed.