IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU
(Criminal Jurisdiction)

CRIMINAL CASE No.99 of 2006

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

-v-

LIAMY SULIVIA BICE

Ms Kayleen Tavoa, Public Prosecutor
The Defendant in person and on his own behalf

JUDGMENT

This is the trial of the Defendant, Liamy Sulivia Bice. The Defendant is charged with one count of Possession of Cannabis, contrary to Section 2(13) of the Dangerous Drugs Act [CAP.12] and one count of Cultivation of Cannabis plants, contrary to Section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Act [CAP.12]. The Defendant pleaded not guilty to both charges.

This Defendant, like 21 others, was represented by the law fir of Ridgway Blake Lawyers to the plea stages. The defence counsel, with the leave of the Court, were excused from appearing at the trial of the Defendant.

The prosecution and the defence counsel have considered the case prior to Court sitting and agreed that the following statements and exhibits go in by consent:-

(1) Moses Tom
(2) Arnold Wayback
(3) Jim Songi
(4) Hickson Siba
(5) Exhibits:-
- Plants 
- Photos
- Crime scene report

The brief facts show that Moses Tom, the Chief of Melip, reported the Defendant to the police. On 20 October 2006, Chief Inspector George Towmey asked the people of Melip if they have a garden of cannabis. A lady, Liamy Sulivia Bice told the police that she has a garden of cannabis. She led the police to her garden. She told the police she had 3 gardens in which she planted cannabis plants. One has 125 plants, the second had 36 plants and the third had 47 plants. The total number of cannabis plants removed in the Defendant’s garden is 208 plants. The Defendant was arrested and brought to Vila with the plants. The plants were identified, weighed and tested. The plants weighed 1.30kgs. The result of the test show the presence of cannabis substance in the plants.

The Defendant exercises her right to remain silent. She did not give evidence. In her final submission, she admitted that because of her faith in God, and as cannabis is God’s creation she planted cannabis.

The law is for the prosecution to prove the essential elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt against the Defendant. If there is a reasonable doubt, the Defendant must be acquitted of the charge. 

Sections 2(13) and 17 of the Dangerous Drugs Act [CAP.12] are the relevant provisions. They provide as follows:-

"PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES AND MATERIALS

2. The … possession in Vanuatu of the following substances and materials… is prohibited:

(13) Cannabis"

"PROHIBITION OF CULTIVATION OF CANNABIS PLANT

4. The cultivation of any plant of the genus Cannabis shall be prohibited."

"PENALTIES FOR CONTRAVENTION OF REGULATION

17. Every contravention of this regulation shall constitute an offence punishable by a fine not exceeding 100 million Vatu or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding 20 years or to both such fine and imprisonment."

Applying the law to the facts, I find that, the prosecution failed to prove the elements of the offence of possession of cannabis, contrary to Section 2(13) of the Dangerous Drugs Act [CAP.12] beyond reasonable doubt against the defendant.

I find, however, that the prosecution has proved the elements of the offence of Cultivation of Cannabis plants, contrary to Section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Act [CAP.12] against the Defendant, beyond reasonable doubt. 

VERDICT

Possession: NOT GUILTY and ACQUITTED
Cultivation: GUILTY and CONVICTED

I direct that the 208 cannabis plants seized from the Defendant, be condemned by 8 May 2007 before lunch time.

DATED at Port-Vila this 7th day of May 2007

BY THE COURT

Vincent LUNABEK
Chief Justice