Regina v Keni [2015] SBMC 5; Criminal Case 596 of 2015 (1 July 2015)

IN THE CENTRAL MAGISTRATES COURT
OF SOLOMON ISLANDS AT HONIARA

(Criminal Jurisdiction)

Criminal Case No. 596 of 2015

REGINA

V

GEORGE KENI

Coram: AULANGA (Magistrate of the First Class)
Prosecution: Mr. Tebakota of Police Prosecutions
Defence: Accused in person
Plea date: July 1, 2015
Sentence delivered: July 1, 2015

SENTENCE

1. You pleaded guilty to one count of driving when under the influence of liquor contrary to section 43 (1) of the Road Transport Act and one of careless driving contrary to section 40 (1) of the Road Transport Act. For a first time offender, the maximum penalty for the first count is a fine $10,000 or 12 months imprisonment and the maximum penalty for the second count is a fine of $5,000 or 6 months imprisonment.[1]
   
2. I enter your conviction on your own guilty pleas.
   
3. The summary of facts tendered by police showed that on 30th of May 2015 at about 7:00pm, you drove a black Suzuki vehicle registration number MA-5318. In front of Punjas building at Ranadi area, you unable to control the vehicle and drove off the main road and hit an iron container stationed at that area. Inside that vehicle were your wife and two children. They sustained minor injuries as a result of the accident. Fortunately, you all survived the accident.
   
4. You further informed the Court that during the day, you participated in a bride price payment gathering at Koa Hill. You drank beer during that occasion. You were on your way to your residence after leaving the bride at Henderson area when you had the accident. You further admitted that you injured two boys as a result of that accident. You still suffer occasional pain to your body. This came about only as a result of that accident.
   
5. The only issue for this Court is to impose the appropriate sentence on you.
   
6. I found the following mitigating and personal features in your favour:- you pleaded guilty at the first reasonable opportunity. This saves the Court's time and resources which otherwise would be spent if you plead not guilty to these charges. You have no prior conviction which shows you are a law abiding person until your conviction today. You are a family man with 5 children. You are employed by South Pacific Oil which shows you are a resourceful person for that Company. You also remorseful by saying sorry and apologise in Court. You had paid compensation in the amount of $2,000 to the two injured boys. You cooperated well with police immediately after the accident by requesting them to come to the scene of the accident.
   
7. I gave credit to all the mitigating and personal features in your favour.
   
8. On the other hand, the aggravating features in this case I found are:- you deliberately decided to drive that vehicle despite you knew very well you consumed alcohol at Koa Hill. You exposed the lives of four persons including yourself to the risk of accident knowing that you were drunk whilst driving that vehicle. You exposed the lives of road users or public at risk. You caused the two innocent boys to unnecessarily suffer injuries as a result of the accident.
   
9. I find your level of culpability places your offending towards the upper end of the level of offending for these two offences.
   
10. The sentence that I will impose on you must reflect the intention of the parliament the need to discourage this type of offending. In Regina v Kemakeza[2] CJ Palmer stated:
    

"the level of the seriousness of offences is reflected on a prima facie basis by what the law imposes as the maximum penalty. The more serious an offence the greater the maximum penalty imposed"[3].

11. Driving when under the influence of liquor is a serious offence as stated in Cheffers v R[4] where Ward CJ, stated:
    

"Driving whilst under the influence of alcohol is extremely serious offence. Anyone who drives in such a state has deliberately done a course of action that puts his own and far more seriously, other people's lives at risk. However carefully he may attempt to drive, his reactions if confronted with an emergency will not be effective as when he has taken no alcohol."[5]

12. Also, careless driving is also a serious offence under the Road Transport Act. Those who involved in this type of offence must not go unpunished. This Court has the responsibility of making sure through its deterrent message that this type of offences be discouraged.
    
13. I must clearly state it here that there is a definite need for those who drive vehicles not to drive when under the influence of alcohol. Not only that but to drive beyond carefulness, and at all times follow traffic law and regulations. Given the increase of vehicles and the prevalence of traffic offences in Honiara, I am of the view that this is high time this Court must ensure its deterrent message must reach out to all corners of this town and the country as a whole that those like you who involve in these type of offending must be deterred accordingly. If this Court imposes a sentence that is too lenient, it would be seen as protecting the crime and indirectly encouraging potential offenders to continue committing these offences knowing that they will be leniently punished by the Court. This will serve no purpose for the need for deterrence and in my view erodes public confidence in the administration of the criminal law and runs a danger of making a mockery to the maximum penalty provided by our traffic laws. You should take home this simple message and pass it to others loud and clear. You will be an asset for Solomon Islands if you pass on this simple message to your friends and families who are licensed to drive motor vehicles.
    
14. On the other hand, if the Court imposes a sentence that is too high, it will be harsh and excessive for you. The Court must maintain a balancing exercise in every case[6].
    
15. I give credit to your guilty plea. In Kingi Pepe v Director of Public Prosecutions (Unrep. Criminal Appeal Case No. 4 of 1987) Ward CJ stated at page 2:
    

'It is well established that, by a plea of guilty, an accused man saves a trial and demonstrates as plainly as anything could, his remorse and regret for what he has done. He is entitled to expect a lesser sentence than would otherwise be merited by the facts but there is no precise figure of reduction that can or should be considered to bind the court. In the usual case where a reduction is made, the amount is entirely in the court's discretion and a court must be free to feel that, in exceptional cases despite a plea of guilty, no reduction should be given.

16. After carefully taking into account all these factors and balancing them with the aggravating and mitigating features of your case, the appropriate sentence is only a fine and not custodial sentence. I therefore impose the following fines:
    
    • (i) Count 1 (driving under the influence of alcohol) – A fine of $ 3,000 to be paid by 4:30pm on 29/7/2015. In default, 6 months imprisonment[7];
      
    • (ii) Count 2 (careless driving) – A fine of $ 1,200 to be paid by 4:30pm on 29/7/2015. In default, 2 months imprisonment.[8]
      
17. The resulting sentence therefore is that you will pay a total fine of $4200 by 29/07/2015. In default, the default sentence of 6 months will run concurrent to each count since both offending occurred in the same transaction.
    
18. I noted under section 29 (1) of the Road Transport Act I am obliged to disqualify you for a period not less than 12 months unless there are special reasons warranting you not to be disqualified. I order that you are accordingly disqualified from driving for 12 months effective as of today. I order that your driving license is retained forthwith by this Court and with a notice of this Order be forwarded to the Motor Vehicle Licence section within the Inland Revenue Department under the Ministry of Finance and Treasury for safe keeping of the license until the disqualification period ends.
    
19. Either party to this case may appeal this sentence within 14 days as of today pursuant to section 285 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
    

ORDERS OF THE COURT

(a) Impose a total fine of $4200 to be paid by 4:30pm on 29/07/2015. In default, 6 months imprisonment;

(b) Accused disqualified for 12 months effective as to this date from driving motor vehicle; and

(c) His driver's license is retained forthwith, to be forwarded to the Motor Vehicle Licence section within the Inland Revenue Department under the Ministry of Finance and Treasury for effecting of the disqualification until the disqualification period ends.

THE COURT

---

^[1] Penalties Miscellaneous Act 2009 as read with section 43 (1) (b) of the Road Transport Act
^[2] HCSI-CRC 467 of 2007
^[3] At paragraph 19
^[4] Unrep. Criminal Case No.11 of 1989
^[5] At page 3
^[6] See R v Suluga[1999] SBHC 42
^[7] See Penalties Miscellaneous Act 2009
^[8] I bid