Section 121:
consolidated text (as at 2017). juris shows the text as it was consolidated; it does not confirm that this is the law in force today.
121. Constitution section 10 – Delay in hearing—The appellant was arraigned in October 1987 and after 11 postponements covering nearly
16 months the hearing started on 23 February 1989. There is no doubt that
an unusually long time lapsed between the arraignment and the hearing. Yet
it is evident that the postponements were due to the difficulty of the prosecution in tracing out the key witness who had left Rodrigues for some time.
The postponements were, except on the last occasion when he failed to
appear in Court, not caused by the fault of the appellant. There was not, because of the time which lapsed between the day of the arraignment and that
of the hearing, a breach of section 10 (1) of the Constitution.
There was a plausible reason why the case had to be postponed. The
Court cannot lose sight of the fact that the trial took place in Rodrigues,
where the geographical, judicial and administrative structures are different
from those in Mauritius. R v Rose (1976).