Tukai v The State [2004] FJHC 260; HAM0067D.2004S (16 November 2004)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL MISC. CASE NO: HAM0067 OF 2004S

Between:

PENI TUKAI
Applicant

And:

THE STATE
Respondent

Hearing: 10th November 2004
Ruling: 16th November 2004

Counsel: Applicant in Person
Mr. W. Kuruisaqila for State

RULING

The Applicant makes another bail application on the ground that the conditions of his custody are unacceptable to him. He says that although he was moved to the “Sacau” dormitory on the 3rd of November, he did not like it there and was sent back to his old cell in the Main Cell Block. He says that he is kept with convicted prisoners and that his cell is old and in a bad condition.

The State objects to bail. State counsel called the Officer-in-Charge of the Korovou Prison to give evidence. His evidence, which I accept, is that the Applicant has remained in the Main Cell Block at his own request. He said that the Applicant was not popular with the other remand prisoners and that he did not wish to be confined with them in the dormitory. He described the conditions in the dormitory. Those conditions are a vast improvement on the condition of the Awaiting Trial Block, which I saw when I visited the Korovou Prison on the 5th of October 2004. He said he did not know if the Applicant wished to be kept in the Awaiting Trial Block but that the Applicant was in a single cell and was fed and given exercise at the same time as the convicted prisoners.

I consider that the Applicant has chosen not to stay in the dormitory-style accommodation offered to remand prisoners by the Officer-in-Charge. In so doing, he has chosen to be in a cell in the Old Cell Block. It appears that the Awaiting Cell Block, the cells of which I described as inhumane and degrading in Senijieli Boila and Pita Nainoka v. State HAC0032 of 2004S is now full of convicted prisoners, and there is no room there for the Applicant anyway. I did not see the Main Cell Block on my prison visit.

The Applicant is not sharing his cell with other prisoners. He is following a timetable for convicted prisoners, which appears to be far more favourable than that for remand prisoners. I do not consider that the conditions of custody outweigh the reasons for refusal of bail earlier in the High Court. It is in the public interest that he remain in custody until trial. Bail is refused.

Nazhat Shameem
JUDGE

At Suva
16th November 2004