Rokonabete v State [2007] FJHC 56; HAM067.07 (14 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

Misc. Case No: HAM 067 of 2007

Between:

SAKIUSA ROKONABETE
AKUILA DROMUDOLE
Applicants

And:

THE STATE
Respondent

Hearing: 13th August 2007
Ruling: 14th August 2007

Counsel: Applicants in person
Ms H. Tabete for State

RULING ON BAIL

The Applicants both face charges of robbery with violence. They have been transferred to the High Court for trial and once information is filed will be tried either at the end of this year or by February of next year. They have been remanded in custody for three weeks.

They both ask for bail to engage counsel of their own choice. They say that using the telephone is difficult from prison and that, in respect of the 2nd Applicant, he is a student at FIT, studying Electronics.

The State opposes bail. State counsel points to the 14 previous convictions of the 1st Applicant, including several for robbery with violence and one for escaping from lawful custody. In relation to the 2nd Applicant who has fewer convictions, she points to his two previous convictions for absconding bail in 2006. She says that the Applicants are charged with a serious offence, that the stolen money has not been recovered and that the presumption in favour of bail is rebutted.

I agree. Both Applicants have a right to bail, but both have a history of disregard for court orders. The 2nd Applicant disputes one of his convictions (on the 25th of May 2007) for absconding, but does not dispute the other. The 1st Applicant has previously escaped from lawful custody. They are both bail risks.

Further, I see no reason why the Applicants or their relatives cannot engage counsel while they are in remand. Finally, I note that the 1st Applicant complains that he has been assaulted by a prison officer. He could not tell me the name of the officer, but said that he was being treated "like a convicted prisoner." He appears to labour under a misapprehension that convicted prisoners deserve to be assaulted. They do not, and a copy of this ruling will be sent to the Commissioner of Prisons to draw the matter to his attention.

Bail is refused and is fixed for review on the 28th of August 2007 before Winter J.

Nazhat Shameem
JUDGE

At Suva
14th August 2007