Republic v Teitarawa [2006] KIHC 15; Criminal Case 27 of 2005 (16 January 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
HELD AT BETIO
REPUBLIC OF KIRIBATI

High Court Criminal Case No. 27 of 2005

THE REPUBLIC

VS

TABWEA TEITARAWA

For the Republic: Ms Pauline Beiatau
For the Accused: Ms Taoing Taoaba

Date of Hearing: 16 January 2006

REASONS FOR NOT FIXING PAROLE PERIOD

During the last session of the Maneaba ni Maungatabu Section 11 of the Parole Board Act 1986 was amended to give the Court when sentencing for an offence having a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment the power to fix a parole period either more or less than 10 years.

New section 11(1):-

(1) Every offender undergoing a sentence of imprisonment of two years or more shall be eligible for consideration by the board for release on parole upon the expiry of the following periods from the date of his reception in a prison after sentencing –

• (a) in the case of an offender undergoing imprisonment for life – such period as may be fixed by the court under subsection (1A) or, where no such period has been fixed, 10 years;
  
• (b) in the case of any other offender – one-half of the term of imprisonment.
  

New section 11(1A):-

Where a court sentences an offender to imprisonment for life, it may, at the time of passing sentence, and having regard to the particular circumstances of the case, fix a period longer or shorter than the standard period of 10 years referred to in paragraph (a) of subsection (1).

As the prisoner is the first to be sentenced since the amendment to section 11 came into effect, the Court should give an indication of how it proposes to exercise the power now given to it.

Ten years has been the length of time before which a person serving a life sentence becomes eligible for parole. For the present the Court will continue to regard ten years as the standard but in each case will consider whether either a higher or a lower parole period should be fixed. If a crime has been particularly foul then the parole period may be increased. If on the other hand there are factors which warrant a shorter period being fixed, such as the circumstances of the crime, no previous convictions, a plea of guilty and so on, then the parole period may be reduced.

In the present case I accept, despite Ms Taoaba’s submissions to the contrary, Ms Beiatau’s submissions that the period of parole should be 10 years.

Accordingly I do not fix a period of parole pursuant to section 11(1A).

Dated the day of January 2006

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice