| Chapter 1: | Corruption and Circumstantial Evidence |
|
|
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
The study has taken the following practical stages into account: (a) complaints received, (b) cases investigated, (c) DPP consent, and (d) court consideration of circumstantial evidence (see table 1). The table also indicates ‘cases transferred’; this means that, upon preliminary investigation or detection by the PCCB, no clues of evidence relating to corruption were found and thus the matter was transferred to the relevant authorities—including the police, the Tanzania Review Authority (TRA), TISS, the Ethics Secretariat, the Human Rights Commission, the Attorney General’s Chambers (or the DPP’s office), and the judiciary.
Other factors that explain why corruption cases fail to secure convictions include rushing cases to court without thorough prior investigation, the absence of a checklist to guide investigators and prosecutors in corruption cases, the lack of in-depth knowledge regarding circumstantial evidence by judicial officers, and a paucity of academic literature on and articulation of circumstantial evidence.
Chart 1. Corruption of cases reported, investigated, and completed.
Source. Research data.