R v Hugi [2021] SBHC 92; HCSI-CRC 356 of 2019 (9 September 2021)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name:	R v Hugi
Citation:
Date of decision:	9 September 2021
Parties:	Regina v Luke Hugi
Date of hearing:
Court file number(s):	356 of 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:
Judge(s):	Maina; PJ
On appeal from:
Order:	1. The accused Luke Hugi is sentence to 4 years imprisonment 2. Time spent on remand to be deducted from this sentence. 3. No further order
Representation:	Kelesi A E for Crown Brook R for Defense
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Penal Code S 142 (1)
Cases cited:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 356 of 2019

REGINA

V

LUKE HUGI

Circuit: Kira Kira, Makira Province

Date of Sentence: 9 September 2021

Counsel
Kelesi A E for Crown
Brook R for Defense

SENTENCE

You, defendant Luke Hugi had pleaded guilty and accordingly convicted upon on own plea on one count of Defilement contrary to sections 142 (1) of the Penal Code.

1. Agreed Facts

The Parties agreed on the following facts:

The defendant in this matter is Luke Hugi, 24 years at the time of the offending from Ubuna village, Arosi 1, Makira Ulawa Province.

The complainant in this matter is Ancilla Suri, who was 11 years, 10 months old at the time of the offending and from the same place as the defendant.

On 15 May 2014 around 11 am, the complainant’s aunt named Ethel told the accused that the complainant was tied to a tree and he followed her to the complainant’s house. As they went closer, he discovered that the he was lied to. They continued talking to each other at a distance about 20 meters away from the complainant’s house when the complainant saw them and went to them.

Not long, the complainant’s mother looked for the complainant and called her three times. They insisted they leave and the complainant’s aunt supported her. The complainant did not go back to their house and leave with the accused and her aunt.

The complainant’s aunt asked the accused to go and bring her boyfriend to join them. The accused went and both joined the complainant and the complainant’s aunt. They rested at a potato garden belonging to a person named Joyce until dark before they were separated. The accused and complainant left and slept at the accused house at Ubuna Village for the night.

The accused and the complainant had sexual intercourse in the accused house that night as they slept together. The complainant told the accused when asked before they had sexual intercourse that she was 13 years old.

In the early morning before dawn the next day, they left Ubuna Village and went to the accused farm house and lived there about 2 weeks before they were separated.

The accused and the complainant had been living in the farmhouse intimately as a couple. Within the two weeks, before they were separated, both have intimately engaged socially and sexually as well.

The complainant’s parents were not happy about what their daughter and the accused did because their daughter was still very young. They then reported the matter to the Police and the accused was arrested.

The accused was remanded for sometimes before released on bail.

The accused and complainant are now both married.

2. The Penalty

Section 142 (1) of the Penal Code states:

“Any person who has unlawful sexual intercourse with any girl under the age of thirteen years is guilty of a felony, and shall be liable to imprisonment for life”.

3. Aggravating features

The aggravating feature in this case is only the difference of age with about 13 years.

4. Mitigation

Credit for guilty plea on the charge at the first instance or the first available opportunity and serves court’s time.

Noted the delay of 7 years and accused is the first offender and now settle down with 4 children.

These will be taken into account in this sentence.

5. The Sentence

Again I wish to express here the prevalence or common of sexual offences in our communities. The evidence with the court records prove the commonality in our country.

For this case it is just one charge that was laid against the accused and may be because of lack of evidences for other charges. As disclosed by the fact that the accused and complainant had been living in the farmhouse intimately as a couple for about two weeks. Before they were separated it cannot be said that both did not had sexual intercourse when they alone in the farmhouse for that two weeks period. This may only be for the objects who do not have living being in them. For human beings and animals at that situations, it cannot just go by at any cost.

I noted the law case in this jurisdiction referred in by the counsels in their submissions and for this case the starting point in the sentence is 5 years.

Taking into account the facts, aggravating features and mitigating factors the appropriate sentence for the accused is 4 years imprisonment.

Orders of the Court

1. The accused Luke Hugi is sentence to 4 years imprisonment
2. Time spent on remand to be deducted from this sentence.
3. No further order

THE COURT
Hon. Justice Leonard R Maina
Puisne Judge