Public Prosecutor v Lockvaro [1998] VUSC 38; Criminal Case No 210 of 1998 (18 August 1998)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU

HELD AT LUGANVILLE/SANTO

(Criminal Jurisdiction)

Criminal Case No.210 of 1span>

(File No.5 of 1998)

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR<

-V-

DOMINIQUE LOCKVARO

Coram: Mr Justice Oliver A Saksak

Cynthia Thomas - Clerk

Cl: Mr Willie Daniel - for Public Prosecutor

Mr Hillary Toa - for the Defendant

SENTENCE

The Defendant appeared and pleaded guilty to a charge of intentional assault. The Prosecution charged that the Defendant assaulted his wife Noeline Lockvaro at Lamap, South Malekula. This happened at a night-club. The Defendant was drunk when he assaulted his wife. The Defendant grabbed his wife and tore her T-shirt. He kicked her on the ribs and fractured the 7th rib. She was unconscious when she was taken to Norshup hospital. The couple did not have a harmonious matrimonial life as the Defendant has also been having sexual intercourse with his wife's sister. They have 2 children as a result of the after which the Defendant clear admits. The Defendant made a statement admitting the assault. He says that he was angry when he saw his wife at the night club. He anticipated that she would stay at home and look after their own children which are 6 in number. The children's age range from 4,6,7,9,10 and 11 years.

In mitigation Mr Toa tells the Court that this man was 37 years old, the father of 8 children. He has 6 children with his lawful wife and 2 by his wife's sister as a result of adulterous affairs. Of the 6 children they have 5 are presently attending schools. The oldest is 11 years and her fees are vt6.000 per term. The second is 10 years old and her fees are vt5,500 per term. The third is 9 years and his fees are vt4,400 per term. The fourth is 7 years and his fees are vt4,400 per term. The fifth is 6 years and her fees per term is vt2,500.

ass="MsoNoMsoNormal" style="margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> The Defendant works as Vanair agent at Lamrport earning vt8,233 per fortnight. The court is told that that this sum falls for too short of the amount of schools fees the Defendant has to pay in respect of his children who attend school. As the only bread-winner also Mr Toa urged the court to be lenient on the Defendant. The Defendant was blind drunk as he had been drinking whole day from morning until night. I am told the Defendant had no intention of breaking his wife's rib as he was so drunk. I am told the Defendant is truly sorry for his actions. To show this he performed custom ceremony to reconcile with his wife. He killed a pig valued of vt15,000 and paid vt10,000 to his wife on 6th August. At the chose of the ceremony they had kava. I am told that the Defendant has confessed his guilt freely and by cooperating with the police. A letter written by the Defendant's chiefs confirm this custom peace ceremony. The letter was tendered dating 6th August 1998. Mr Toa submits that there was no injury of a permanent nature. The medical report did not show this. Mr Toa submits that the Defendant should not be given custodial sentence but should be treated in the same way as the court treated Teci Tavon to give a chance to the Defendant to maintain his family.

class="MsoNoMsoNormal" style="margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> I accept most of what Mr Toa has said. But I find it hard to accept tha Defendant and his family ily live only on vt8.233 per fortnight. If the Defendant can drink from dawn to dusk, he must have a lot of money. I don't accept his extra-marital affairs with his wife's sister and I remind the Defendant that adultery is unlawful against the Supreme Law of God.

In the circumstances I sentence the Defendant to one (1) yearisonment suspended for a pe a period of 3 years.

DATED at Luganville this 18th day of August, 1998.

BY THE COURT

OLIVER A SAKSAK

Judge of the Supreme Court