Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
| Published date | 01 April 1957 |
| Date | 01 April 1957 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002201835702100205 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Judicial Committee of the
Privy
Council
SCOPE OF APPELLATE
JURISDICTION
IN
CRIMINAL
MATTERS
Zakos v. The Queen
THE observation of Viscount Simon, L.C., quoted at p. 41
was referred to by the Judicial Committee (Viscount
Simonds,
Lords
Oaksey, Tucker, Cohen
and
Somervell of
Harrow) in Zakos v. The Queen (1956, 1
W.L.R.
1162), an
unsuccessful appeal from
the
judgment
of the Supreme
Court
of Cyprus.
In
this case the Board also referred to a passage
from the
judgment
of the Board delivered by
Lord
Dunedin
in
Mohinder Singh v. King-Emperor (1932
L.R.
59
I.A.
233, 235):
"Their
Lordships have frequently stated
that
they do not sit as a
Court
of Criminal Appeal.
For
them
to interfere with a
criminal sentence there
must
be something so irregular or so
outrageous as to shock the very basis of justice".
The
appellants were charged with and convicted of
discharging
and
carrying firearms contrary to regulation 52
of
the
Emergency Powers (Public Safety
and
Order) Regula-
tions, 1955, and sections 20
and
21 of the Criminal Code of
Cyprus. Section 20 of
the
Code made aiders
and
abettors
guilty of the offence charged,
and
section 21 related to common
intent, and the appellants, alleging
that
they were not found
guilty of themselves discharging or carrying firearms
and
that
their "offence" lay in the application to their case of section 20
or 21 of
the
Code, contended
that
those provisions did not
apply to regulation 52 and that they had therefore been charged
with and convicted of offences unknown to
the
law of Cyprus.
They
submitted
that
in the Criminal Code an "offence" was
defined in section 4 as meaning an act punishable by law,
that
section 2of the Interpretation
Law
of Cyprus defined
"law"
as
"any
enactment by the competent legislative author-
ity of
the
Colony",
that
regulations made by
the
Governor
under
the Emergency Powers
Order
in Council of 1939
and
1952 were made by him in his executive, not his legislative,
146
To continue reading
Request your trial