Nyarugenge Intermediate Court on February 4 heard an appeal filed by Arnaud de Bosscher Shema, popularly known as DJ Toxxyk, challenging a lower court decision to remand him. He is facing charges related to a road accident in which a police officer was killed. According to the prosecution, he allegedly committed the offences on December 21, at around 4 a.m., when he struck and killed Police Constable Fred Mushabe, who was directing traffic along Sopetrade Road during ongoing construction works. Shema is currently seeking provisional release pending trial, arguing that he has family responsibilities, including taking care of a young child, sick parents and business obligations. He also pledged to comply with any conditions the court may impose and presented a surety to support his request. However, prosecutors opposed the appeal, asking the court to uphold the lower court’s ruling. ALSO READ: DJ Toxxyk remanded over fatal road accident Grounds of appeal In their submission, Shema and his legal team argued that the lower court lacked reasonable grounds to justify his detention. They questioned the credibility of a village leader’s report regarding suspected drugs allegedly found in his home. The defence further claimed that Shema was tested three times for drug use but never received the results. On the charge related to involuntary manslaughter, the defence maintained that the incident resulted from an accident without criminal intent. They argued that this alone should not constitute sufficient grounds for remand, particularly since the prosecution had not demonstrated the need for further investigations requiring detention. ALSO READ: DJ Toxxyk pleads guilty to manslaughter, fleeing accident scene The defence also told the court that Shema’s family had visited the family of the deceased police officer and sought forgiveness, noting that both sides reportedly acknowledged the incident as accidental. Regarding the drug use allegations, Shema’s lawyers argued that Article 29 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to legal counsel, was not respected during his interrogation at the Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB). They claimed that their client signed statements without reading it and that the search conducted at his residence was unlawful. The defence described the prosecution’s case as being based on fragile and doubtful evidence, arguing that the alleged substance had not been scientifically confirmed as an illegal drug. They further questioned the role of the village leader in identifying the substance, noting the absence of laboratory verification. Prosecution’s response Prosecutors rejected the defence claims, stating that Shema was informed of his right to legal representation during interrogation. They acknowledged that the fatal accident may not have been intentional but argued that CCTV footage suggests that Shema was intoxicated before the incident. Prosecutors also alleged that after the accident, he fled the scene by abandoning his vehicle near ONOMO Hotel before travelling to Gisozi and later to Karongi, which they said demonstrated an attempt to evade responsibility. On the drug use accusations, prosecutors said Shema initially admitted to drug use before later retracting his statement. Prosecutors further allege that after hitting the officer, Shema abandoned the vehicle near ONOMO Hotel and fled the scene. They also told the court that earlier that night, Shema had been at Kigali Universal Bar, with video footage reportedly placing him there shortly before the accident. Additionally, prosecutors said a search at his residence led to the recovery of two grams of hybrid cannabis. The court is expected to deliver its ruling on the appeal on February 9.
