Police v Kawage [1998] PGDC 10; DC33 (15 June 1998)

Unreported District Court Decisions

[1998] PNGDC 10 - POLICE V STEVEN KAWAGE

[1998] PNGDC 10

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[DISTRICT COURT OF JUSTICE]

NO 867 OF 1998

POLICE (Informant)

v

STEVEN KAWAGE (Defendant)

Kimbe

T. Mongko, Magistrate

15 June 1998

CRIMINAL LAW - possession of dangerous drug - cannabis without authorization - effect of admission to possession - quantity of cannabis substantial - Need to impose deterrent sentences.

Representation:

Counsel/Representative:

Informant:

Defendant: In person

T. MONGKO:

N1>[1]      The accused is charged under s3(1)(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act (Ch228). It was alleged by the prosecution that on 14 June 1998, at the Kimbe Main Wharf, West New Britain Province, the accused had in his possession dangerous drugs as specified in the Schedule of Dangerous Drugs Act, namely, 2.4 kg of dried cannabis leaves, without authorization or any regulations made thereunder.

N1>[2]      On arraignment, the accused was asked whether it was true that he had in his possession the dried cannabis leaves. He admitted having them in his possession and explained that he was told by some young men from his area that such drug would fetch a lot of money if sold in the coastal provinces. Revenue from sales of that cannabis was estimated at K2,400.00. Because of what he told, he came from his Highlands village to Kimbe by ship via Lae, Morobe Province. He said it was his first time to come to Kimbe.

N1>[3]      The cannabis was inside at the bottom of a black handbag which also contained some local vegetables. The bottom of the bag was cleverly cut and after the cannabis was inserted, it was then sewn up. This was done to conceal the cannabis when the bag is opened and checked at a checkpoint at the wharf. It was expected that upon arrival the bag would be checked by police. As expected, the bag was thoroughly searched by police and the cannabis was found and confiscated by police.

N1>[4]      Because the accused admitted being in possession of the cannabis the court proceeded to impose a penalty. During allocutus, the accused did not say much but that he had already committed an offence and it was up to the court to impose a penalty.

N1>[5]      Before passing sentence the court informed the accused that drug abuse in Papua New Guinea (PNG) is on the rise. Compared to the world PNG is one of the top countries where drug abuse is rampant. Court also made the accused aware that in some overseas countries, a person convicted for a drug offence attracts severe penalty while in other countries death penalty is imposed. Court further informed accused that while drug abuse in PNG was a major concern there are really no stringent measure to prevent same from happening. The current penalty prescribed under the Dangerous Drugs Act is imprisonment for a term not less than three months and not exceeding two years. This penalty could be amended in the near future and would certainly attract severe penalty compared to the present penalty due to the increase in drug abuses. The accused, if he sold the cannabis would fetch about K2,400.00 on the streets. Anybody would buy it and especially youths and most if not all would be severely affected by the use of the drug cannabis.

N1>[6]      I consider the quantity of cannabis i.e. a weight of 2.4 kg to be substantial. In view of the rise in drug abuse in PNG in recent years, I consider that the maximum penalty is sufficient to deter would be offenders. I am of the view that a two (2) year sentence of imprisonment is sufficient and is not unreasonable in the circumstances. As to the exhibit, I order it be forfeited to the State and destroyed.

N1>[7]      Sentenced accordingly.