Republic v Ieera [1997] KIHC 80; CRC 38 of 1997 (28 November 1997)

HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
(BEFORE THE HON R LUSSICK C.J.)

HCCrC 38/97

THE REPUBLIC

v.

OBERA IEERA

Ms T Beero for the Republic
Mr D Lambourne for the Accused

Date of Hearing: 28 November 1997

SENTENCE

The accused has pleaded guilty to two charges of incest contrary to Section 156(l) of the Penal Code Cap. 67. Although only two charges have been brought, it is not in dispute that the accused, during a period from 1992 to 1993, had sexual intercourse with his daughter Tuin on several occasions. When the accused commenced having intercourse with his daughter she was 14 years of age. This course of conduct ceased in 1993 when the daughter ran away to her paternal grandmother.

I am told the accused is aged 43 and is originally from Arorae. In 1986 his wife left him with 4 children, one of whom was the victim. The accused then commenced drinking heavily and entered into a state of depression. I am told that the accused has had very little formal education. He believes in the traditions surrounding magic and in 1992 he went to a woman in South Tarawa who, I am told, was known for her powers of magic. His purpose in going to her was to seek her assistance in finding him a new wife. According to the accused, this woman cast some spells directed to that aim. The spells, I am told, were subject to certain conditions, one of which was that no female member of his family was to touch or sleep on his sleeping mat. The members of his family were not told of this and the victim, his daughter Tuin, was the first member of the family to break this condition. It was from that point in time that the accused commenced having sexual intercourse with her.

I must confess that I am unable to understand why it would be a necessary result of the daughter touching or sleeping on the sleeping mat that the accused would then commence having sex with her. In any event, as has already been mentioned, the victim ran away in 1993 and in the following year, the mother found out what had been happening and complained to the police. The accused was interviewed by the police and made a full admission in December 1994. For some reason unexplained to me, charges were not brought until 21 July 1997. I agree with counsel for the accused that a consequence of the delay is that the accused has had the charges hanging over his head for all of that time.

The offence must be regarded as serious. When the offences began the victim was aged only 14, so that sexual intercourse was an offence quite apart from the parental relationship. It has not been alleged that the accused used any force on the victim, so that it could be said that she consented in such a way as to render a charge of rape inappropriate. However, because of her young age and because of the very close relationship, she was in a particularly vulnerable position which the accused was able to exploit. I have heard nothing from the victim herself, so that I am unable to say whether this experience has led to any physical or emotional trauma.

In the accused's favour he is a first offender and he pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, thus sparing his daughter the additional stress of having to give evidence. An understandable result of his behaviour is that his 4 children have left him and he has been shunned by his family and all who know him. I am satisfied that he has shown genuine remorse for what he did.

Taking everything into account, the accused is convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 3 years on each charge, such sentences to be served concurrently.

THE HON R B LUSSICK
Chief Justice

(28/11/97)