The Court of Appeal has questioned if a judge was correct to dismiss the appeal of a man convicted of sex offences over a failure to make submissions before a hearing.

Shuja Amon Muhammad was convicted by magistrate Khamisi Tokunbo in 2023 of touching two girls for a sexual purpose between August 1 and September 30, 2021.

In a separate trial that same year, the magistrate also found Muhammad guilty of intruding on a young girl’s privacy in a February 2022 incident in which he made comments about a 13-year-old girl’s figure.

None of the complainants can be identified for legal reasons.

While he has not been sentenced for the offences, the court heard that he spent more than two years on remand after he was charged in the Magistrates’ Court.

Muhammad launched an appeal against both of the convictions, but his appeal was summarily dismissed in January by Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe.

He subsequently sought to have the matter sent back to the Supreme Court on the basis that Mr Justice Wolffe was not able to dismiss the case without hearing arguments.

The Court of Appeal heard yesterday that in the months leading up to the January hearing, the Supreme Court repeatedly requested submissions from Muhammad, but deadlines were repeatedly missed.

Elizabeth Christopher, council for Muhammad, said that she had sent submissions the day before the January hearing but the court heard that they still had not been received when that hearing concluded.

Ms Christopher told the Court of Appeal that she was one of the only lawyers who would take on sex offence cases in the Supreme Court.

Ms Christopher said that throughout that autumn she was involved in multiple jury trials and had warned the court that she would be challenged to meet the deadlines.

Adley Duncan, for the Crown, said that a judge could summarily dismiss an appeal if the appellant and council failed to attend the hearing on the basis that the appeal was “abandoned”.

However, he said if the council and appellant were in attendance the appeal could not be considered abandoned and the judge could request submissions be given verbally.

The Court of Appeal panel, however, questioned if a judge would be empowered to dismiss an appeal if orders were repeatedly not followed.

The panel reserved its decision for a later date.

The convictions were not Muhammad’s first for sexual offences against minors.

In 2014, he was sentenced to ten years behind bars after he was found guilty of four counts of sexually exploiting another girl while in a position of trust following a Supreme Court trial.

Those offences reportedly took place in two incidents between August 1 and September 30, 2013.

Muhammad again denied the offences but was found guilty on all counts by a unanimous verdict.

• It is The Royal Gazette's policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. As we are legally liable for any slanderous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.