State v Mui [2000] PGNC 32; N1992 (19 April 2000)

N1992
PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE IN MADANG]

CR 475 OF 2000

THE STATE

-V-

GILMAN MUI

MADANG : SAWONG J.
2000 : 17TH, 19TH APRIL

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Arson – Plea of Guilty – Two years imprisonment in hard labour –

Counsel:
MR. RUARRI, for the State
MR. KARI, for the Accused

19th April, 2000

SENTENCE

SAWONG J: You were indicted and pleaded guilty to one count of arson an offence, contrary to S. 436 of the Crime Code Act (Ch. 262).

The facts are that you had an argument with your mother relating to some activities involving your family members. You got angry with your mother, and you armed yourself with a plastic container of kerosene and a box matches and went to your mother’s house. Upon your arrival you told your mother and her other children to get out of the house. When they came out of the house, you went in, poured the kerosene and set it alight. The fire spread and eventually, your mother’s house together with her and your relative’s personal properties were burnt down completely.

THE PRISONER

You are a 32 year old married man with no children. Your father passed away in 1993, only your mother is alive. You have 5 brothers and 3 sisters. You are the third born in your family. You completed grade 6, and was living in the village as an ordinary villager up until you committed the offence. You are a first offender. You were apprehended on 24 January 2000, a period of approximately, 4 months.

The crime of arson attracts a possible term of life imprisonment, subject to S. 19 Code. The legislature has considered this crime to be so serious that it has prescribed the maximum sentence to be of life servitude.

I am not aware of any Supreme Court decision on what the appropriate sentence ought to be. However the National Court has imposed sentences from wholly suspended sentences to terms of imprisonment. In so far as the offence involving a dwelling house is concerned, see for example, State v Elsi Marasmalik, State v Linus Kaniko, State v Ipu Samuel Yomb.

In Marasmalik, Jalina J, imposed a suspended sentence. There the accused set fire to her brother’s house after an argument with her brother. There was no one in the house.

In the present case, no one was inside the house when it was burnt down. But having said that, it is clear that you deliberately set out to burn down your mother’s house. After you set it alight you tried to stop it but you couldn't, because you had used kerosene. Your relatives lost all their personal effects.

In the circumstance, I think that a short and sharp custodial sentence ought to be imposed. None of that ought to be suspended. This will act as deterrent to you personally and to act as a general deterrent to like would be offenders.

In your favour, I take into account that you pleaded guilty, that you are a first offender, that there was some provocation in the non-legal sense and that you are sorry for what you did to your family.

In all the circumstance, you are convicted and sentenced to two years IHL. I deduct the period of 4 months, leaving a balance of 1 year and 8 months IHL to serve.
___________________________________________________________
LAWYER FOR THE STATE : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
LAWYER FOR THE ACCUSED : PUBLIC SOLICITOR