Mociu v State [2014] FJHC 529; HAM257.2013S (17 July 2014)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO. HAM 257 OF 2013S

SAILASA MOCIU

vs

THE STATE

Counsels: Mr. M. Fesaitu for Accused
Mr. Y. Prasad for State
Hearing: 2 May, 2014
Ruling: 29 May, 2014
Written Reasons: 17 July, 2014

WRITTEN REASONS FOR DENYING BAIL

1. The accused, presently faces the following information in High Court Criminal Case No. HAC 052 of 2013S:
   

Statement of Offence

MURDER: Contrary to Section 237 of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009.

Particulars of Offence

SAILASA MOCIU on the 9th day of January 2013, at Naisaumua Tailevu in the Central Division, murdered Kasaya Veiseikonabou.

2. The case will be tried from 3 to 14 November 2014 (2 weeks trial). The accused had been remanded in custody from 25 January 2013 to now, that is, 1 year 5 months 22 days ago. He applied for bail pending trial on 11 November 2013. The parties were required to file some papers. On 2 May 2014, I heard the application. On 29 May 2014, I ruled against the application, that is, I denied the accused's bail application. I said I would give my reasons later. Below are my reasons.
   

3. Every accused person has a right to bail pending trial, unless the interest of justice requires otherwise. The test for granting bail is whether or not the accused will turn up in court on the date arranged, to take his trial. In deciding the above, the court is duty bound to consider the factors outlined in section 19 of the Bail Act 2002.

Factor No. 1: Likelihood of Accused's Surrender to Custody:
4. The accused was 43 years old, at the time of the alleged offence. He was also married to the deceased victim, and they had 4 children. The marriage was going through certain difficulties, resulting in the alleged murder. According to the prosecution, the accused allegedly confessed to murdering his wife, at the material time. Although the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, in a court of law, if found guilty after trial, he faces a mandatory life sentence. Furthermore, after committing the alleged offence, he was on the run from police. Under this head, the accused's chances of bail are slim.

Factor No. 2: Interest of Accused:
5. The case will be heard from 3 to 14 November 2014, that is, 3 months away. He is been remanded at the new Suva Remand Centre. He is represented by Legal Aid Commission lawyers, and they can visit him in custody, to prepare his defence. Although he's been remanded in custody since 25 January 2013, time spent in remand will be taken into account when fixing the non parole period. There doesn't appear to be any need for him to be at liberty for other lawful reasons. He is not incapacitated. In my view, his chances of bail under this head are slim.

Factor No. 3: The Public Interest and Protection of the Community:
6. The allegation against the accused is serious. He allegedly murdered his wife when their marriage was "on the rocks". In my view, it is in the public interest and the protection of the community that he be remanded in custody, until trial time. Under this head, his chances of bail are slim.

Conclusion:

7. Given the above, I refused his bail application on 29 May 2014, and the above are my reasons.
   

Salesi Temo
JUDGE

Solicitor for Accused : Legal Aid Commission, Suva.
Solicitor for State : Office of the Director of Public Prosecution, Suva.