Skip to main content

What is corroboration?

What is corroboration?

Corroboration connotes support or confirmation in relation to the law of evidence and basically refers to testimony which tends to confirm a fact in issue upon which some evidence has already been given. It is the independent evidence which will render the truth of the testimony more probable as to the commission of the offence and implication of the accused therewith. 

The peculiar characteristics of corroborative evidence have been set out in the case of R v Beck namely; 

  1. The evidence comes from an independent source;
  2. It must be credible witness;
  3. It confirms that the crime or the act has been committed; and 
  4. The evidence implicates the accused in the commission of the crime or the impugned acting some material particular. 

The case of DPP v. Hester from common law has shown that one credible witness is enough. The Supreme Court of Mauritius has reaffirmed this principle through the case of Paruit v. R, where it was held the court has the power to convict where necessary on the evidence of a single without corroboration as there is no such rule of law which mentions the contrary. But there are exceptions, such as where it is provided by statute or long established practice. In the case of Botte v. Queen, it has been further affirmed that the court may act on the uncorroborated evidence of a witness who is completely reliable. 


It is also very important to note that there is no corroboration where the primary itself is not credible enough for the court as held by the case of Kassim v. R.  


In the absence of corroboration, should the Courts dismiss the case outright?


Corroboration is fundamentally to confirm usually a fact in issue upon which an evidence has already been given. Thus, if the witness is reliable and credible as to the appreciation of the court then there is no real use for corroboration of the evidence. As if the court can put trust in the evidence and believes that the evidence is credible, there is no necessary use to support or confirm the evidence, if the court can already attached a reasonable amount of weight for conviction. 


In the case of DPP v Subrattee where the Court on appeal made the observation that in general, at common law one credible witness is sufficient. It can be also seen in the case of Paruit v R that the Court can convict on uncorroborated evidence and it has also been held that there are no rule of law that governs the corroboration of the evidence. The Magistrate can also convict on the uncorroborated evidence of a single witness in the same vein from the case of Paruit v. R. 


Thus, it can be seen through the case laws and from the eyes of a reasonable person that the Courts should be able to convict in the absence of corroboration of the evidence and not at all to dismiss it outright. But it is to the appreciation of the Court to decide depending on the weight that they attach to the evidence from the witness. 


Yovesh Gunnoo 

Including Information from the Office of the DPP Newsletter. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sythé War

T he drugs are taking on the youth as if the pollution of our planet is not enough to endanger our future. Mauritius has become a place where drugs are becoming readily available to any person as from the age of 12. Youngsters buying drugs on the streets and going to school completely out of the world but the real issue is how these students are getting the drugs. One cannot imagine how readily drugs are available in Mauritius especially the infamous ‘Sythé’. If you did not attend the secondary school in the last 5 years you are not aware of the situation in Mauritius and how the drugs are affecting the youth. Many teachers and stakeholders in the Minsitry of Education do not know the system of the ‘ti baron’ in the schools which is one of the key problems in the spreading of drugs in these institutions. ‘Sythé’ which comes under many names like ‘bat dan latet’, ‘crocodile’ and others, have become so cheap that a dose of these can be bought by anyone. The average price of a dose...
Post a Comment
Read more

The declaration of assets act 2018.

  The declaration of assets act 2018 is one of the legislations which has been widely popular among the population. As this legislation has the duty to bring transparency to the wealth of the public figures who are mainly politicians. The assets of any Member of Parliament can be consulted on the website of ICAC.  However, this piece of legislation is not as effective as it should have been as there are loopholes which maybe have been kept deliberately. The aim of this law is to bring the assets owned by the Members of Parliament to the eyes of the population. There are numerous ways by which the politicians can escape this piece of legislation.  We should also keep in mind that the Members of Parliament will not enact an act which will endanger their power, money and influence. If we make an abstraction on the fact the ICAC is not really independent, the declaration of assets act 2018 is full of loopholes ready to be used.  The fact that trust law in Mauritius shiel...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Fight for Universal Suffrage

T he right to vote is a fundamental principle enshrined in the Constitution of Mauritius. The universal suffrage is taken for granted by Mauritians, especially the new generation. The right to vote was not a gift but it was the fruit of a long and difficult fight.  The right to vote gives the power to the people of Mauritius after 5 years to choose the Member of Parliaments and the Government they want to see in power. The right to vote is a very important tool in a democracy, as the will of the people is expressed through these votes. Unfortunately, in this modern era a lot of Mauritians no longer have an interest in the elections especially the youngsters. The typical sentence used by most Mauritians is ‘1 vote la ki pou changer sa’, indeed one vote will not changed the outcome of the election.  On the other hand, in the recent general election of 2019 in Mauritius in the constituency No. 1 the number of votes separating the third and fourth candidate is 47 votes and i...
Post a Comment
Read more