Regina v Mino [1997] SBHC 40; HC-CRC 004 of 1997 (25 July 1997)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Criminal Case No. 4 of 1997

ter">REGINA

-v-

BEN OFOANIA MINO

Hearing: 24th July, 1997 - Sentence: 25th July, 1997

Counsel: R.B Talasasa for the Prosecution; A. H. Nori for tfor the Defendant

PALMER J.:

The accused has been convicted under section 312(a) of the Penal Code for the offence of arson. This is categorized under our laws as a very serious offence carrying a maximum imprisonment sentence for life.

It is clear on the facts that the accused carried out the offence with cool and calculating efficiency, so much so, that the building housing the offices of Golden Springs International (SI) Limited, a logging company, was totally engulfed in flames within minutes and that nothing could be saved despite the fact that the Fire station was only a few hundred metres away. The facts as presented to this Court revealed that six cans of four litres each of petrol were used to set the building alight. The accused drove in with a truck carrying those cans of petrol and then after telling the occupants of the house to get out, he poured petrol inside and outside of the house and set it ablaze. The rest is history. Nothing could be clearer that the accused set out to destroy the building completely, and that he achieved his goal. To a certain extent the accused had manifested an idiosyncrasy which cannot be taken too lightly. On the other hand, at least it can be noted in his favour that he did not intend to endanger the lives of anyone in that building, having given sufficient warning to the security man guarding the premises with his son to get out of the building before setting it on fire.

I have listened and noted with care the matters said on behalf of this accused together with his character reference given by a close relative, all given with honest and genuine intentions to assist the court come to a sentence that would correctly reflect what is just and fair according to law. Justice however has many faces. What is just to the victims in this case, may not necessarily be regarded as just by the accused and others, and vice versa. Those who have strong anti-logging sentiments may have different views to what is just and fair and how this accused should be dealt. Learned Counsel, Mr Nori has gone to the extent of recommending to this court that in view of all the background circumstances surrounding this case that the court should consider a suspended sentence.

That powerful mitigating factors have been raised on behalf of this accused cannot be denied. Of particular relevance, is the background facts pertaining to the Company's logging activities at the customary land area which this accused and members of his tribe have consistently resisted from the beginning. I take into account the commercial ramifications, which this accused, being an accountant by profession, was acutely aware of and which it has been sought to be suggested contributed to the feeling of great incense, loss and betrayal that this accused must have gone through before embarking on the course taken, unlawful though it may have been. I also note the customary implications which have been suggested would arise, through the desecrations of their tabu sites; such as ancestral curses and the sense of loss associated with them.

I take into account that there does appear to have been a lot of effort expended by this accused and members of his tribe in trying to communicate to the Company and others that their customary land should not be touched and that these all added fuel to the fire that was already burning in the heart and mind of this accused.

These have been very helpful in assisting the court come to a proper understanding of the motives and the reasons for the accused's, if one might want to call it "bizarre actions". And this in a way has been one of the thrusts of Mr Nori's powerful submissions to this court, that the actions of this accused were out of the ordinary, an unexpected and unfortunate event which would not have taken place in the normal course of events, and that the high-handed attitude and behaviour of the Company Management only added insult to injury, and did not help things either. He asks therefore to a certain extent, that this accused should be treated somewhat differently, from the usual course taken by the Courts. Mr Nori has also highlighted the feeling of frustration which the accused and may be many other members in his tribe would have felt when it seemed that their grievances which had been pursued according to the due process of law appeared not to have been addressed with efficiency and decisiveness. These I take into account in considering sentence.

I will treat this accused as a first offender, and not take into account a previous conviction relating to the possession of liquor in unlicensed premises. I give due credit for that.

The scales of justice however do not stop there. The gruesome fact remains that a building worth approximately three quarters of a million dollars had been completely destroyed and that it was done with calculated precision. This accused does not profess to be suffering from any disease of the mind to excuse his actions. It is clear he knew what he was doing, fully aware of the fact that he was taking the law into his own hands and and of the consequences that would follow. He cannot be described as lacking intelligence in anyway. And so whether he likes it or not, he must also have taken the fact into account that for his unlawful actions, he must be punished for it according to law. At the end of the day, that is the standard that each individual must come face to face on this side of life. The fact that things do not seem to be going his way, however worthy his cause may be does not justify a breach of the rule of law. I note that one of the submissions which Mr Nori seeks to put across to this court is that this accused had weighed carefully the loss that his tribe would incur if the logging activities of the Company were to be continued unabated, as against the loss which may be caused to the Company by his actions and therefore acted accordingly. If the court were to accede to this type of argument, then this court will be breeding lawlessness, instead of helping in some way to curb and control it.

This Court has often repeated that whatever grievances there are, people should practice restraint and working within the framework of the law to sort out those grievances.

And if at the end of the day, the law is unable to meet the ends of justice and peoples' needs, then Parliament through their elected representatives is the proper alternative to address those needs and grievances through appropriate laws that, hopefully will address those grievances.

I have thought anxiously and carefully over this case because of the impact that it can have on the minds of the public. I am conscious of the fact that the right kind of message must be sent out. That a custodial sentence is warranted is inevitable in the circumstances. The range within which this case would come under is 5-7 years. Taking all the mitigating factors into account, including the age of this accused, his guilty plea, his young family and the impact of imprisonment on them, his previous good character and his business activities which will be affected to some extent, and his remorsefulness, I am prepared to reduce this further to 3 1/2 years. The issue of suspended sentence does not arise thereby and in my view would not be appropriate in the circumstances of this case.

The accused is sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison and to be served with effect from 24th July, 1997.

<

ter">THE COURT