Rape convict Sindano Hango has reached a cul-de-sac in his attempts to appeal his conviction.
The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the High Court’s decision to convict Hango for raping his cousin in 2014.
Hango turned to the Supreme Court after the Oshakati High Court turned down his appeal to contest his conviction.
“Having read the petition and other documents filed on record, it is ordered that the petition for leave to appeal is refused,” a court order read.
The matter was heard before Chief Justice Peter Shivute and justices Sylvester Mainga and Theo Frank.
Hango was convicted of rape in February 2021, following an appeal by the State.
He was initially found not guilty at the end of his trial last year by presiding magistrate at the Oshakati Regional Court at the time, Leopoldt Hangalo.
Following his conviction, his case was remitted back to the regional court, however, Hango stood to contest his conviction following several postponements.
Sindano is also accused of bribing the complainant with N$10 000 to allegedly withdraw the rape charge.
The court heard Hango sent family members to talk her into withdrawing the case in exchange for that amount.
The initial investigating officer also tried to talk the woman into withdrawing the case.
It has been the victim’s testimony that Hango forced himself onto her by holding her arms to the back while one hand forcefully removed her jeans and underpants.
During the scuffle, the victim says she fell to the floor and then fled to her room, where Hango followed her, threw her on the bed and forcefully penetrated her.
The victim at the time also told the court that she informed several family members about the rape.
However, some attempted to talk her out of registering a case, while others advised her to pursue it.
Hangalo said at the time of acquitting Hango that after considering the evidence presented in court, he was not convinced that a rape was committed.
Hango had maintained in his own defence during the trial in the regional court that the whole act was fabricated, and that it was the victim’s idea that he should give her money to take care of her personal needs.