BY MELVILLE TITIULU
The Court of Appeal (COA) recently upheld the judgement against a taxi driver who had been found guilty of rape.
The COA held that the rape of an adult by a taxi driver unknown to the complainant warrants a starting sentence of at least 10 to 12 years imprisonment, which should reflect the breach of trust placed in the driver of the taxi.
This comes after the Court of Appeal on May 1, 2026, dismissed an appeal made by the taxi driver who had been convicted of rape and had appealed the judgement.
The three appeal justices noted in their ruling that: “The starting point for a conviction of rape of an adult by a taxi driver, unknown to the complainant, would warrant a starting point of at least 10 to 12 years imprisonment before considering other aggravating and mitigating factors, in order to recognise the gross breach of trust placed in the driver of the taxi”.
The taxi driver made an appeal against his rape conviction challenging a High Court finding of his guilt as ‘unsafe and unsatisfactorily based on evidence’.
The appellant (taxi driver) who cannot be named to protect the identity of his victim was convicted on December 1, 2025 for raping a 23-year-old woman who had recently moved to Honiara.
On November 21, 2022, the complainant took a taxi driven by the appellant. Instead of stopping at her home, the appellant drove her to a private area and had sexual intercourse with her without her free and voluntary consent.
The court heard that the complainant resisted and made it clear she did not consent, both verbally and through her actions.
Counsel for the appellant submitted that the lack of evidence that would show “force, threats, violence or intimidation should have raised alarm bells that the prosecution has failed to prove the allegation of rape”.
However, the appeal justices noted that the appellant was not someone known to the complainant, she had been in Honiara for only a short time.
“She engaged a taxi to go back to her aunt’s home. The driver did not stop to let her out but in effect abducted her. He took her to a relatively remote place where he commenced trying to touch the complainant in an intimate way.”
Thus, the appeal justices were of the view that the complainant had not consented to the sexual activity and the appellant must have known or at the very least was reckless as to that lack of consent.
“The charge of Rape is characterised in the penal code as a crime against morality,” the appeal Justices noted.
The Court of Appeal Justices include, Sir John Baptist Muria, Chief Justice Sir Gibuma Gibbs Salika, and Howard Lowry.
For feedback, contact: [email protected]
Editor: [email protected]
