Regina v Musuota [1997] SBHC 7; HC-CRC 041 of 1996 (7 March 1997)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Criminal Case No. 41 of 1996

REGINA

class=lass="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> v

class=lass="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> JOHN MUSUOTA

High Court of Solomon Islands
Before: Lungole-Awich, J
Criminriminal Case No. 41 of 1996

Hearing: 28^th-31^st October 1996
Sentence: 7^th March 1997

Counsel: F Mwanesalua for the Prosecution;
A Radclyffe for the Accused

class="Mso="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> SENTENCE

(LUNGOLE-AWICH, The accused is a member of Parliament. He has two previous convictions both dated 20.8.1996 and would appear arise from the same incident. They relate to drinking and must have been minor offences, when one considers the penalties of $20 and $60 imposed for them. Moreover, they are really not related to the present two convictions, on count 4 for Misconduct (acceptance of benefit) and on count 5 for allowing integrity to be called into question. I disregard the previous convictions. I have taken note of the other mitigatory facts presented by counsel and to some extent referred to by the DPP properly.

The trtion for which accused has been convicted is really one, being that while a leader heer he accepted the use of a hired car from 4.9.1994 to about 10. 11. 1994, some 9 weeks. That transaction is technically two offences; the first is Misconduct in office under section 14 (1) of the Leadership Code (Further Provisions) Act for which he is convicted on count 4. The second is Allowing Integrity to be Called into Question, contrary to sections 94 (1) (c) of the Constitution as read with section 24 (1) of Leadership Code (Further Provisions) Act, for which he has been convicted in count 5. For sentencing purposes I shall treat them as alternatives.

The offences of Misconduct Office (accepting benefit) or allowing integrity to be o be called into question sound serious indeed, especially when one notes that the latter is even provided for right in the Constitution itself, yet the punishments that Parliament has authorised the court to impose for the offences are very light. Maximum punishment is $1000 or 1 year imprisonment or both. The maximum is of course preserved for the most disgusting of misconduct in office. In this case the misconduct is the acceptance of improper benefit, the use of a hired car for 9 weeks. It is not unthinkable that there could be acceptance of a million dollars or more or of benefits that large. So the court cannot exhaust the maximum in this case.

Mr. John Musuota is sentenced on count 4 to pay a fine of $900, almost the maximum. In default he will serve 4 (four) months' imprisonment. In my view the offence Mr. Musuota has committed does not call for immediate imprisonment. He is given 30 days to pay the fine.

I have consideret court should pass sentence on each count an accusedcused is convicted on. Section 9 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not make it mandatory to pass sentence on all counts on conviction at one trial. The word used there is "may." Count 5 is in reality an alternative; the act of the accused being the same act in count 4. I therefore pass no sentence on it.

I have already stated that the maximum penalties provided for the twonces and indeed for all thel the offences under the Leadership Code (Further Provisions) Act is too small. The court must of course keep within that punishment. It is for the relevant authorities to think about that.

Accused is advised that he may appeal in 30 days. He may do so against both both conviction and sentence.

Dated this 7^th day of March 1997

ungole-Awich
JUDGE

[About the School of Law] | [Courses Offered] | [Course Materials] | [Staff]
[Pacific Law Materials] | [Journal of South Pacific Law]
[Emalus Campus Library] | [Recommended Internet Links]
[Latest Additions] | ef=".../search_index/QUEx/QUERY.HTM">[Search the Site]<

© University of outh Pacific 1998-2002

If you have any comments, suggestions or difficulties with using this web site please email
Robynne Blake, Internet Project Manager, The School of Law, The University of the South Pacific or fax: [phone]

Last Update: Thursday, July 04, 2002 15:13