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

State v Koroisalili [2006] FJMC 3; Criminal Case No 39 of 2005 (27 January 2006)

IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT
AT SUVA

Criminal Case No. 39 of 2005

STATE

V

LEONE KOROISALILI

Prosecution: Raisuni.
Defence: In Person

JUDGMENT

The accused in this case has been charged for Criminal Intimidation under S330 (a) of the Penal Code.

Particulars are on 18th December 2000 with intent to cause alarm without lawful excuse, threatened Eta Navara with a cane knife to cause personal injuries.

The prosecution called 4 witnesses. The accused gave sworn evidence and called one witness on his behalf.

The evidence before court is that Eta Navara with others went to clean up Namaka Island which she was taking care of for absentee owner who was in the United States. It is a freehold Island.

On 18/12/00 the accused with others about 20 people threatened Eta saying the Island was taken over by them and if anyone sets foot to the Island, will be killed. He had Knife which he was swinging on the sand. Others were holding knifes and sticks.

The accused said "No Kadavuan people was to enter the Island. Anyone, coming will be chopped down." They also said the Island was given by forefathers and should be returned to them as landowners. Complainant was frightened. She didn’t disembark but came back and reported to Lami police.

They had various meetings to discuss the matter but to no avail. The accused admits being present on Island but denies threatening.

The accused says he was on Island without 10 people. He says he was told to chase Kadavu people from the Island by the Chief. But he denies doing it. He had no idea if he trespassed the Island or who the Kadavu people were.

The defence witness called himself the village chief gave evidence. He said he authorized namesake of accused to chase Kadavu people from the Island but accused was there without his authority. He realized under cross-examination and accepted his instruction was unlawful.

I have considered whole of the evidence.

The complainant’s evidence is accepted to have credence. This is confirmed by the defence also. I find it as a fact that the accused with many others threatened and intimidated the Eta Navara unlawfully.

They didn’t allow her to enter the Island to carry out her clean up in December 2000. She didn’t pursue and had to return to Lami and reported to police. I find the prosecution case is proved beyond reasonable doubt.

The accused is found guilty as charged.

Dated this 27th day of January 2006.

Ajaml Gulab Khan
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE