R v Batolo [2020] SBMC 17; Criminal Case 510 of 2020 (28 May 2020)

IN THE CENTRAL MAGISTRATES COURT

IN THE SOLOMON ISLANDS

Criminal Case No: 510 of 2020

In the Criminal Jurisdiction

BETWEEN: REGINA

V

AND: DAVIS WILLIE BATOLO

Before: Emily Z Vagibule

Prosecution: Mr Ephraim Pitasua

Defence: self-represented

Date of submissions: 28^th of May 2020

Date of sentence: 28^th of May 2020

SENTENCE

1. Mr Batolo, you have entered guilty pleas for the offences you are charged with. The maximum penalties for each of these offence have already been highlighted throughout the proceeding. However, for purposes of this sentence, I will outline the maximum penalties, which are as follows:
   • Count1: 10,000 penalty units or twelve months imprisonment or both^[1]; and
   • Count2: 5000 penalty units^[2] or six months imprisonment or both^[3].
2. I cannot stress enough, how these maximum penalties are more than enough to signal the seriousness involved. These figures were reached after our legislators have come to see the increase and the urgency to address the prevalence of traffic related cases. Since the respective increases, which were done in 2009 and 2016, traffic cases are still sky rocketing. As a Magistrate who deals with traffic cases on a weekly basis, I am confident to say, that our traffic laws are still ineffective and people are becoming more ignorant than ever.
3. Facts show that you were arrested on the 2^nd of May 2020 in front of the Central Police Station, in relation to the offences at hand.
4. In terms of drunk driving, the court has already imposed hefty penalties on previous offenders. This was done with the intention to send out messages of general deterrence. However, more and more cases keep on showing up before the court.
5. It is quite discouraging to see how ignorant and disrespectful some of us are. Some of us Solomon Islanders are so infested with this infestation commonly known as the NO CARE ATTITUDE that we tend to pay less consideration to the safety of other people. We do not care if things end well, all we care about is ourselves and what suits us at the given time. An example is when a person drives a vehicle whilst under the influence of alcohol. That very action, whether one knows it or not, puts many lives at risk. This can be supported with the idea, that a vehicle in itself can be deemed as a weapon of mass destruction. It is capable of taking innocent lives, if the person operating it is not in his or her right state.
6. A good number of traffic related accidents have ended up in the loss of innocent lives. Had you been living in another universe, then you would not have known the possible consequences of your action. I do not think your status as an expert driver, if you see yourself as one, would be able to assist in the event that you are caught in an unforseen accident or emergency.
7. The case of Cheffers v Regina is very clear in this regard, when Ward CJ, as he was then, stated:

'Driving whilst under the influence of liquor is an extremely serious offence. Anyone who drives in such a state has deliberately than 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 as effective as when he has taken no alcohol^[4].

What really concerns me is how you made the deliberate decision to drive whilst under the influence, putting lives at danger. It was fortunate that no tragic accidents were recorded on your part, otherwise you would be sitting behind that bar. Your actions clearly shows how self-centred and ignorant you are.

8. In light of the second count, facts have shown how your vehicle license had already expired on the 30^th of April 2020. The fact that the expiry date is not far from the date of your arrest, does not change a thing. You could have renewed your licence on the day it expired or the day after, which was a Friday, or you could have left the vehicle at home until you are in the position to have the vehicle license renewed. Instead you drove it on a Saturday, knowing that the relevant license had already expired. You also knew that what you were doing on that day, is unlawful and unfair on other men and women who have tried their best to always ensure that their vehicle license is validated.
9. I need not say much since you are a fully grown man who is well aware of what is to come when laws are bent.
10. At this stage, I must stress how I will be considering the prevalence of traffic offences as one that gives weight to any given case as serious in nature. A person’s deliberate decision to commit an offence or to engage in actions which they know is wrong, in my view, become an extremely serious factor to consider. Ineffective law enforcement and ignorance of the law by members of the public, are the main reasons as to why our traffic laws can never be taken seriously.
11. This afternoon, I will consider your early guilty pleas, the fact that you are a first time offender, the fact that you are unrepresented and your genuine remorse. On the other hand, I will also consider the seriousness involved, your level of culpability, the time of the offending’s and the involvement of alcohol.
12. The court will not in any way tolerate such unlawful actions and will always ensure that our position is maintained.
13. I also acknowledge how courts must always treat cases based on the circumstances and merits involved. This might not go in parallel with comparison of previous sentences, but does not stop prosecutions from delivering the duties and details required of them.
14. Thus, having weighed the entirety of this case, I am of the view that the appropriate sentence I should impose, is one of a fine. Prosecutions has asked that should a sentence of fine be imposed, then the court should consider having the fines run concurrently. However, I wish to stress that the offences at hand are in breach of existing regulations. Offences created under a regulation, cannot be treated together, since they are separate offences. The court can only consider having sentences run concurrently, in the even that a sentence of imprisonment is ordered.
    
15. Hence, for the purposes of specific deterrence, rehabilitation and retribution, I now order that you be sentenced to a sentence of fine as follows:

ORDER

(i) Count 1: $3500;

Count 2: $1300;

(ii) Total fine of SBD$4800.00;
(iii) Fine is due by the 11^th of June 2020
(iv) In default of payment, six months imprisonment; and
(v) Right of appeal applies to any [arty that is aggrieved.

Dated this 28^th day of May 2020.

________________

THE COURT

EMILY Z VAGIBULE

---

^[1] Section 43 A (1) (a) of the Road and Transport Act (as amended by the Police and Transport Legislation) (Amendment) (Alcohol Testing) Act of 2016.
^[2] Penalties and Miscellaneous Amendment Act 2009
^[3] Section 7 (1) of the Road and Transport Act

^[4] Unrep. Criminal Case No. 11 of 1989