I WOULD like to express my dissatisfaction at apportioning of sentences on certain cases.
I do not understand the rationale of how someone found with skins of two leopards can be asked to pay K10,000 and get off scot-free while someone found with a pangolin is given a five-year jail sentence with hard labour.
Are some judgments guided by stipulated law or are they handed out at the discretion of the judge?
I am kindly requesting our learned colleagues to educate the general public on the determining factors in the cases mentioned above.
I remember sometime back, one man was slapped with a five-year sentence for being found in possession of a parrot. However, someone who is believed to have killed two leopards gets a fine which is far less than the value of the products he was found with.
To a layman like me, this is unfair. But our learned colleagues should take time to educate people on some of these things to avoid being misunderstood.
The media should also help in terms of educating the public on such matters.