|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
High Court of Fiji |
IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LAUTOKA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL CASE NO.: HAC 127 OF 2013
STATE
-v-
SEREMAIA DELA
Counsels : Mr. A. Singh for the State
Mr. R. Kumar for the accused
Date of Sentence : 6 December 2013
(Name of the victim is suppressed she is referred to as MN)
SENTENCE
First Count
Statement of Offence
Rape: Contrary to Section 207 (1) and (2) (a) of the Crimes Decree 44 of 2009.
Particulars of Offence
Seremaia Dela between the 1st day of April, 2012 and the 31st day of May 2012, at Nadelei Village, Vatukoula, Tavua in the Western Division, penetrated the vagina of MN, with his penis, without her consent.
Second Count
Statement of Offence
Rape: Contrary to Section 207 (1) and (2) (a) of the Crimes Decree 44 of 2009.
Particulars of Offence
Seremaia Dela between the 1st day of August 2012 to the 20th day of September 2012, at Nadelei Village, Vatukoula, Tavua in the Western Division, penetrated the vagina of MN, with his penis, without her consent.
Third Count
Statement of Offence
Rape: Contrary to Section 207 (1) and (2) (a) of the Crimes Decree 44 of 2009.
Particulars of Offence
Seremaia Dela between the 1st day of December 2012 to the 31st day of December 2012, at Nadelei Village, Vatukoula, Tavua in the Western Division, penetrated the vagina of MN, with his penis, without her consent.
Sometimes on the 1st day of April 2012 to the 31st day of May 2012 the MN (hereinafter referred to as the "Victim") was at home washing dishes when she was called by the Seremaia Dela (hereinafter referred to as the "Accused") from the footpath. The accused told the victim to go and wait for him at the side of the river. Accused followed the victim to the river where he forcefully made her to lie down. He then forcefully removed the victims skirt and grabbed her hand to touch his erected penis to which the victim refused. Accused then forcefully made open the legs of the victim, undressed himself and then inserted his erected penis into her vagina and had forceful sexual intercourse with her for about 15 minutes. After having sexual intercourse with the victim the accused warned her not to tell anyone about this incident as he will do something to her. Victim got scared so badly that she never informed anyone about the incident.
The second incident occurred between the 1st day of August 2012 to the 20th day of September 2012 when the victim was on her way to pick lemon leaves. The accused dragged the victim to the nearby empty house and warned her not to shout. He then forcefully removed the victim's clothes and had forceful sexual intercourse with her for 15-20 minutes.
The third incident occurred between the 1st day of December 2012 to the 31st day of December 2012 when the accused informed the victim to go to the gum tree beside the river. When the victim reached the destination the accused pretended that he was chasing a wild horse. The accused then forcefully removed the victim's clothes and had forceful sexual intercourse with her. She described her experience as painful. The victim did not report the matter because she was frightened of the accused.
This matter only came to light when the police women from Vatukoula Police Station gave lecture to the students at Nadelei Catholic School and amongst the students was the victim, MN. The victim relayed the whole story to one W/Cpl Senimili. He was later interviewed under caution to which he admitted to committing the offence of rape. The victim was 14 years old at the time of the offence.
"We consider that at any rape case without aggravating or mitigating features the starting point for sentencing an adult should be a term of imprisonment of seven years. It must be recognized by the Courts that the crime of rape has become altogether too frequent and that the sentences imposed by the Courts for that crime must more nearly reflect the understandable public outrage. We must stress, however, that the particular circumstances of a case will mean that there are cases where the proper sentence may be substantially higher or substantially lower than that starting point."
"Rape of children is a very serious offence in deed and it seems to be very prevalent in Fiji at the time. The legislation had dictated harsh penalties and the Courts are imposing those penalties in order to reflect society's abhorrence for such crimes. Our nation's children must be protected and they must be allowed to develop to sexual maturity unmolested. Psychologists tell us that the effect of sexual abuse on children in their later development is profound."
In this case 42 year step father was sentenced for 13 years with non parole period of 10 years for digital rape of 14 year old step daughter.
"The accused's engagement in his unilateral sexual activity with a little girl who was insensitive to such activity is most abhorrent. This kind of immoral act on a little girl of MB's standing is bound to yield adverse results and psychological trauma, the effect of which is indeed difficult to foresee and asses even by psychologists and sociologists. The depravity of the accused in committing the offence should be denounced to save little children for their own future; and, the men of the accused's caliber should not be allowed to deny the children of their legitimate place in the community. In passing down the sentence in case of this nature, deterrence is therefore, of paramount importance."
Considering all, I increase your sentence by 3 years, now the sentence is 16 years imprisonment.
Considering all, I reduce 1 year from your sentence, now your sentence is 15 years imprisonment.
"The effect of the totality principle is to require a sentencer who has passed a series of sentences, each properly calculated in relation to the offence for which it is imposed and each properly made consecutive in accordance with the principles governing consecutive sentences, to review the aggregate sentence and consider whether the aggregate is 'just and appropriate'. The principle has been stated many times in various forms: 'when a number of offences are being dealt with and specific punishments in respect of them are being totted up to make a total, it is always necessary for the court to take a last look at the total just to see whether it looks wrong'; "when... cases of multiplicity of offences come before the court, the court must not content itself by doing the arithmetic and passing the sentence which the arithmetic produces. It must look at the totality of the criminal behavior and ask itself what is the appropriate sentence for all the offences."
If separate sentences are given for each of these cases, it will have a crushing effect on you. The State had conceded this position. Thus, I order this sentence to run concurrently with the sentences you are already serving.
Summary
Sudharshana De Silva
JUDGE
AT LAUTOKA
On 06th December 2013
Solicitors for the State: Office of the Director of Public Prosecution
Solicitors for the Accused: Office of the Legal Aid Commission
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJHC/2013/671.html
