Kandapen v Romabe, Commissioner for Police [1995] PGNC 20; N1336 (14 June 1995)

Unreported National Court Decisions

N1336

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

WS 606 OF 1994
THERESA KANDAPEN - Plaintiff
v
DONALDSON ROMABE - First Defendant
COMMISSIONER FOR POLICE - Second Defendant
THE STATE - Third Defendant

Mount Hagen

Woods J
8 June 1995
14 June 1995

LIABILITY OF STATE FOR ACTIONS OF ITS SERVANTS - police shot and killed deceased - in course of duty - damages - dependency claim - exemplary damages - State sanctioned murder.

Cases Cited:

Dambe v Peri & The State [1991] Unreported N1156

Helen Jack v Karani & The State [1992] PNGLR 391

Counsel:

P Dowa for the Plaintiff

J Kawi for the Defendant

16 June 1995

WOODS J: This is a dependency claim for the death of Mathew Liu who was shot by a member of the police force near Laiagam in the Enga Province on the 9th February #160; The deceased was admitted to hospital but died some days later on the 13th February from the injuries received. The Plai is the widow of t of the deceased and she is claiming for herself and the children of the age between herself and thed the deceased and also for the mother of the deceased. The claim is agaihe first irst defendant who it is alleged was the police officer who actually shot the deceased, and the Police Commissioner as the Person responsible for the oion of the Police, and the State being the employer of the the first defendant. It is alleged the first dest defendant shot the deceased while he was acting in the course of his duty as a police officer.

It is alleged that the deceased was travellith one Peter Wanis on the road Laiagam to Poro PorgePorgera on the 9th February when Peter was ordered over by the police and when the vehicle stopped the police came and shot the deceased and Peter Wanis. The State and ther defendafendants have failedefend this clai claim properly and judgement was signed against the State and the other defendants. This case has now befo for the assessment of damages. The hate has appeared on d on this assessment 160; and has not souo set set aside the dt judgement but has negotiated with the lawyer for the plaintiff on the general damages on s on the dependency claim and agreement has beeched on those damages which are to include the loss of inco income dependency both past and future, and also to cover the estate claim and interest and costs.

The figure agreed for damages as above is K38,998.66 which is to be distributed at follows:

valign="tgn="top">

Plaintiff	K23,923.19	<
Mother Ling Nambu	K1,053.24
Balance to be invested by the Registrar for the children as follows:
Lawrence	K4,741.67	Until he attains the age of 18 years estimated to occur on 1st June 2000
Cathy	K2,563.63	Until she attains the age of 18 years estimated to occur on 1st June 2002
Betty	K3,108.98	Until she attains the age of 18 years estimated to occur on 1st June 2004
Bruceley	K3,608.05	Until he attains the age of 18 years estimated to occur on 1st June 2005

There is also a claim for exemplary damages and there has been no agreement on that so submissions were presented to me. The Plaintiff is referro t to the cases of Dambe v Peri & The State [1991] and the Helen Jack v Marius & The State [1992] PNGLR 391 where exemplary damages were awarded where police had killed people in the e of their duty. In t In those an award ofrd of K30,000 was awarded as exemplary damages. Thianother case where ther there appears to have been a cold blooded shooting for no reason. The Shas sought to bring ning no explanation as to why these men ordered to stop and then shot, there is no evidence that that they were breaking the law nor that they were wanted felons.

Innt cases of what is popularpularly called police raids on villages this court has declined to award exemplary damages against the State for what appeared to have been action in the independent discretion of the police concerned. In those cases this court has been reluctant to find that the People as embodied in the Preamble to the Constitution as the State can be punitively respon for assault and destruction conduct which appeared to be conduct in the independent discreiscretion of the individual police concerned. However here we have a blod blooded shooting by police acting on duty and no challenge by the State to the fact that the policeman was acting in the course of his duty and had good reason to stop the deceased nor that the deceased failed to obey the police officer’s order or request and we have a family that has lost its father. In sircumstances this cour court will follow the lead given in the Dambe and Helen Jack cases referred to above and award a further K20,000 damages against the defes.

I also feel that this matter requires further actr action. This case involves what can only now be described as a cold blooded murder committed by the first defendant the police officer Donaldson Romabe, both he and the State having declined to enge the liability and having provided no background story tory explaining the action. Yet therno evidence that that the first defendant has been charged or even disciplined. Instead it has intimated tted to the Court that he is still a serving polificer. That is a scandalous state of affairs and brin brings discredit on the police force and the operation of the State servi#160; Does it mean he is stis still walking the streets in a uniform committing murder under the sanction of the State and the State is left to pay the costs. This ds an explanation fron from the Commissioner of Police at the least, however this file will be send to the Public Prosecutor for consideration of appropriate action and also to the Ombudsman for an investigation if nothing is done to protect the people of this country against State sanctioned murderers in uniform.

I order judgement against the first and third defendants in the sum of K58,998.66.

Lawyer for the Plaintiff: P DowaLawyer for the Dehe Defendants: Solicitor-General