Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Fiji

State v Sereka [1995] FJHC 84; Hac0013t.1993s (2 May 1995)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO.HAC0013 OF 1993

STATE

V.

JONETANI SEREKA

Counsel: Mr. Tuiqereqere for State
Accused in person

Conviction: 1st May 1995
Sentence: 2nd May 1995

SENTENCING REMARKS OF PAIN J.

Jonetani Sereka, yesterday just before your trial was due to commence, you pleaded guilty to a charge of rape.

The circumstances of the rape are appalling.

The complainant at the time was a 17 year old student who was not known to you. On a Saturday afternoon, she arrived in your area to stay with a friend. You grabbed her, threatened her, and dragged her along the road to a vacant house. You forced her to the floor, removed her clothing and raped her.

An eye witness observed her struggling and crying. After you had raped her, several other men from your group also raped her in turn. Later she was taken into the bush and raped again. The whole ordeal lasted several hours. She was subjected to dreadful abuse.

This experience must have had an enormous physical and emotional effect on the complainant. She says that she had not previously experienced sexual intercourse. She lost consciousness for a period when she was first raped by you. The physical injuries she sustained are set out in the medical report. The traumatic emotional harm must have been substantial. The abuse of a young girl in this way must be condemned in the strongest terms. A gang rape is a vile offence. It cannot be tolerated in this or any society. Such serious offending requires a substantial and deterrent sentence.

Two others were jointly charged with you. They were convicted last year following a defended hearing. They each raped the girl immediately after you first raped her. Each was sentenced to eight years imprisonment. One of those offenders appealed to the Court of Appeal against that sentence. The Court of Appeal said that the circumstances of the offence called for a deterrent sentence and a term of eight years imprisonment was not excessive in the circumstances.

In my view there is an aggravating feature as far as your offending is concerned. You initiated this sudden sexual attack upon a stranger. You dragged her to the house and forced intercourse upon her. You were primarily responsible for all that occurred. You were the ring leader or instigator. Your companions followed suit after you had forcibly raped the girl and rendered her powerless to resist.

The only mitigating circumstance is that you have now pleaded guilty to the offence and saved the girl the distress of recounting the experience again in Court. That is a significant factor in these cases. Although in this instance, it is not as mitigating a feature as it may be in some other cases. The plea was certainly not made at the earliest possible occasion and the complainant has had to live with the prospect of giving evidence again until just before she was due to be called as a witness yesterday. Moreover, the two co-accused had already been convicted on the same evidence. The case against you was overwhelming and you had already acknowledged commission of the offence, particularly in your statement when charged. Nevertheless, some credit must be given for your plea. I see it as balancing the aggravating feature that I have referred to.

I must have regard to the sentence imposed on your co-offenders. In all the circumstances, you should receive the same sentence.

You are sentenced to eight years imprisonment.

I am concerned that the complainant in this case should not suffer further distress by publication of her name. Some statutory provision is called for. It is quite inappropriate for victims to receive such publicity. Not only is it stressful for them but it is likely to deter victims from making complaints. In the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this court to regulate trials in the interests of justice, I order that her name not be published.

JUSTICE D.B. PAIN

HAC0013T.93S