BY JENNIFER KUSAPA

THE court has reiterated that addressing sexual offences in the country requires collaborative effort from all stakeholders.

Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer, in his recent sentence on a sexual offence case, said while the courts have a duty to ensure there is sufficient general and specific deterrence in the community by the type of sentences that are imposed, it requires the concerted and collaborative effort of all stakeholders in the community to address this deluge in sexual offending against young girls.

“It is shameful that this type of offending is becoming commonplace,” Palmer said.

He said some sexual offences attract maximum sentence of life imprisonment which reflects the level of seriousness and concern with which such type of offence is considered and viewed in the community and the need to protect young girls from other men and themselves.

“The protection of young children is the focus of this type of legislation and the law provides in the case of young children that consent is not a defence.  Sexual intercourse with a child below the age of 15 years does not require lack of consent as an ingredient of the offence

“This is an established principle in the law, that a child below the age of 15 years cannot consent and so the fact of sexual intercourse and the child’s age is sufficient to found a conviction; that is not disputed in this case,” he said. 

He said the courts in the country have repeatedly stated that those who commit this type of offence should expect to be sent to prison.  Each case however is to be treated separately on its merits and an appropriate sentence imposed.

BY JENNIFER KUSAPA

A man has been handed a four-year jail sentence after court found him guilty of repeated sexual abuse of an underage girl.

The incidents took place on various dates in 2018.

Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer made the sentence during the recent court circuit in Gizo last week.

The man who cannot be named for legal reasons was charged with the offence of persistent sexual abuse of a child under 15 years contrary to section 142(2) of the Penal Code as read with section 139 of the Penal Code as amended by the Penal Code (Amendment) (Sexual Offences) Act 2016 (“the Amendment Act 2016”). 

Palmer said the offence is a new offence enacted under the Amendment Act 2016 and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

“The maximum sentence of life imprisonment reflects the level of seriousness and concern with which this type of offence is considered and viewed in the community and the need to protect young girls from other men and themselves.

“Sentences imposed in this type of offending must reflect the level of culpability and accountability based on the circumstances of offending and the offender.”

He said in this case there were three instances of sexual abuse in the offending put together under this one offence and as such the offence targets the repeated nature of offending and while there may have been consent, it is still an abuse.

Palmer also highlighted one of the aggravating features is the age disparity of prisoner; at the time of the offending the prisoner was 21 years old while the victim was 14.

As an older person, there is an expectation of being responsible and accountable in protecting young girls from this type of offence.  He has failed to exercise restraint and responsibility in the circumstances of this case.  As well he was already in a de facto relationship with another woman and so should have known better to not seduce the victim, Palmer said.

He also said in the facts provided before the court, there were three instances of sexual contact like sexually harassing the victim and on two occasions sexual intercourse involved.

Therefore, Palmer, after considering the submissions made by the prosecution and defence and taking into account the prisoner’s early guilty plea, a first-time offender, his remorseful and with prospects of rehabilitation fairly good, reduced three years and another year for delay, thus leaving a total sentence of four years to be served. 

Palmer also made an order that the period spent in pre-trial custody is to be deducted from the sentence.

Andrew Meioko of the office of the Director Public Prosecution appears on behalf of the crown while Lazarus Waroka of the Public Solicitor’s office represented the accused.

BY JENNIFER KUSAPA

The case against owner of One Link Pacifica money scheme is set for mention today in court.

The case was mentioned last week for possible plea but was adjourned.

Charles Dora is facing charges under the financial institution act of 1998.

It is alleged that on July 4, 2019, he registered the money scheme One Link Pacifica (OLP) at the company Haus under the name of Mr Charles Dora as Director and Mr Dora is the proprietor and sole trader of the OLP, he is also a manager for online mentors.

OLP scheme was described as sharing resource; however, it is a Ponzi scheme, the essence of the scheme is that investors give money towards the company, on promise there will be a higher return after 30 days of investment, the creator of the scheme then used recruiting agents (mentors) for people to come along and invest their money through them.

Prosecution alleged that Dora collected deposits from mentors by way of online deposits.

Prosecution also alleged that between the period of December 2019 to March 2020, investors did not receive their money as promised. Within the period, CBSI warned public members about the operation of the scheme, that one-link Director Mr Charles Dora did not apply for a licence under the FIA to engage in the business of banking in Solomon Islands.

On March 4, 2020, CBSI wrote to Dora as Director of One-Link to make available to CBSI records, books or accounts relating to the business for examination within seven working days pursuant to section 3(3) of the FIA. However, Dora did not provide detail documents or failed to comply such their bank account details, receipt books and accounts books.

Later on, March 27, 2020, CBSI informed Police that One Link Pacifica seemed to be operating as a banking business, and does not comply with the Financial Institution Act, it was at that time investigations were made and the accused was arrested for that offence.

Prosecution alleged that Dora knowing his co-accused was arrested on April 4, 2020, went and hid at Russel Islands, Central Islands Province up until his arrest on June 1, 2021.