Section 210: Non-retroactivity of criminal activities – Interpretation of section 10 (4)
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.
210. Non-retroactivity of criminal activities – Interpretation of section 10 (4)
of the Constitution—Plaintiff sought to declare ultra vires legislation which
denied entitlement to remission of one third of sentence to all those convicted of drug offences before amending legislation passed in 1994 came
into effect. He also sought to declare that the period he spent on remand
pending the trial and determination of the appeal should be counted as
served sentence and that he be released forthwith from prison.
HELD the Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Act 1994 and the Child Protection Act 1994 were in breach of section 10 (4) of the Constitution to the
extent that they purport to extend the application of the new provisions to
those imprisoned for offences committed prior to the coming into force of
that provision. The one and only factor to be taken into account by the
prison authorities should be the date of the commission of the offence, so
that the plaintiff was entitled to benefit from the provision of section 50 of
the Reform Institutions Act giving him remission of one third of his sentence.
However, the period of time spent on remand by him cannot be considered
as served sentence. Samynaden v Commissioner of Prisons (2005).
[Issue 1] CON – 222
Revised Laws of Mauritius