The prosecution has requested the Nyarugenge Intermediate Court to sentence Arnaud Shema de Bosscher, popularly known as DJ Toxxyk, to five years in prison and impose a fine of Rwf 2.21 million, arguing that the sentence handed down by the lower court on May 4 was too lenient considering the gravity and consequences of the crimes he committed. The court on Friday, May 15, started hearing the appeal case involving DJ Toxxyk, who was found guilty on four charges related to a fatal road accident and drug-related offences. The charges include involuntary manslaughter, drug-related offences, fleeing the scene after causing an accident, and refusing to submit to a breathalyzer test. ALSO READ: Nyarugenge court hears DJ Toxxyk's appeal case The appeal was filed by the prosecution, which is challenging the sentence handed down by Nyarugenge Primary Court, which ordered DJ Toxxyk to pay a fine of Rwf1,050,000 and perform three months of community service, suspended for six months. Why prosecution appealed The case stems from a fatal road accident that occurred in the early hours of December 20, 2025, along Sopetrade Road in Kigali, where DJ Toxxyk allegedly struck and killed Police Constable Fred Mushabe, who was directing traffic at the time. During the appeal hearing on Friday, the prosecutor argued that the penalties imposed by the primary court commensurate with the seriousness of the crimes, especially given that the traffic incident led to the death of a police officer on duty. According to the prosecutor, the lower court focused heavily on the defendant’s conduct after the incident, including admitting to the crimes and showing remorse. “The court did not properly consider the gravity of the crimes, the consequences they caused, and the manner in which they were committed,” the prosecutor argued. ALSO READ: DJ Toxxyk fined, sentenced to community service The prosecutor said the court failed to apply Article 49 of the Penal Procedure Code, which requires judges to determine sentences based on the gravity of the offence, its consequences, and the motives behind it. She highlighted that the crimes had severe consequences because they resulted in loss of life and involved a police officer carrying out his duties. The prosecutor also maintained that the sentence failed to meet the objectives of punishment under the law, including educating offenders and deterring others from committing similar crimes. “We believe the penalties of fines and suspended community service are too lenient compared to the impact of the crimes committed,” prosecutor submitted. The prosecution side also told the court that DJ Toxxyk’s conduct before the incident should have been considered, arguing that evidence presented in the primary court showed he had come from a bar before the crash and that drugs were later found at his residence. “All these elements demonstrate conduct that should have been considered by the court when determining the sentence,” the prosecutors argued. They insisted that a prison sentence of five years and a fine of Rwf2.21 million would be proportional to the seriousness of the offences and serve as a lesson to others. Defence rejects prosecution claims DJ Toxxyk, however, told the court that he regretted the offences committed and believed the sentence handed down by the lower court was appropriate and within the limits of the law. One of his lawyers, Marie Josée Uwamahoro, argued that the prosecution side had failed to demonstrate any legal flaws in the judgment issued by the primary court. She said all the penalties imposed were provided for under the law and noted that judges have discretion to impose sentences depending on the circumstances of a case. She pointed out that, for involuntary manslaughter, DJ Toxxyk was fined Rwf1 million in accordance with the law. For fleeing the scene after causing an accident, he was fined Rwf30,000, while refusing to undergo a breathalyzer test attracted a fine of Rwf20,000. He was also sentenced to community service for drug-related offences. Uwamahoro cited the criminal procedure code, arguing that an appeal must clearly demonstrate flaws in the previous judgment, which she said the prosecution had failed to do. She also referred to jurisprudence from higher courts indicating that judges are allowed to impose lighter sentences than those requested by prosecutors when circumstances justify it. According to the defence, Nyarugenge Primary Court considered several mitigating factors, including that DJ Toxxyk was a first-time offender and had shown genuine remorse during the trial. The defence also rejected the argument that his presence at a bar before the accident should automatically be interpreted as evidence of bad conduct, saying that the nature of his work as a DJ requires him to be in such places. The lawyers further contended that the fact that the victim was a police officer should not, on its own, justify a harsher sentence. They argued that the law does not provide for different penalties based on the victim’s profession. They added that DJ Toxxyk should not be treated as an example in a unique case such as this and maintained that judges have discretion to reduce sentences below the prosecutors' request. Faustin Murangwa, another defence lawyer, maintained that the case concerns involuntary manslaughter and not intentional homicide. “What happened was an accident,” Murangwa told the court, adding that the prosecution appeared to be treating the case as though it involved a premeditated killing. After hearing arguments from both sides, the court announced that its decision will be delivered on May 22.
