PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Vanuatu Ombudsman's Reports

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Vanuatu Ombudsman's Reports >> 2004 >> [2004] VUOM 5

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Alleged Delay and Inaction in Investigating Motor Vehicle by Police and the Public Prosecutor [2004] VUOM 5; 2004.07 (13 August 2004)

04-08-13%202004.07%20Alleged%20Delay%20and%20Inaction%20in%20Investigating%20Motor%20Vehicle%20by%20Police%20and%20the%20Public%20Prosecutor00.png


OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN


PUBLIC REPORT


ON THE


ALLEGED DELAY AND INACTION IN INVESTIGATING MOTOR VEHICLE BY POLICE AND THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.


13 August 2004


9236/2004/07


REPUBLIC OF VANUATU


PUBLIC REPORT ON THE


ALLEGED DELAY AND INACTION IN INVESTIGATING MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT INVOLVING DUDLEY ARU BY POLICE AND THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.


SUMMARY


Police delay in investigating any complaint that has been reported to the police is an on-going issue that have always been investigated and reported by this Office.


This report is issued publicly in order to highlight the lack of commitment on the part of police and more specifically the Traffic Department relating to a car accident that involved Mr Dudley Aru sometimes in 1997 under the influence of alcohol.


The Ombudsman has found that despite the Police presence on the scene, the police has only started to investigate this matter, as from 19 May 1999, two years later to recover the case. There was no clear information and explanation on such delay of investigation in this case.
The Ombudsman also found that the office of the Public Prosecutor has also contributed in delaying the process of the case before it went to court. The Police record indicated that the case has been completed on June 1999 and was sent to the Office of the Public Prosecutor. However, the case was completed and listed for hearing on November 2001, which means two years and five months. As a result of the delay of investigation on the part of both Police and the Office of the Public Prosecutor, the case was rejected on the grounds of unreasonable lapse of time.


Both the Office of the Public prosecutor and the Police Traffic Department being regarded as Law Enforcement Authorities were not able to explain the reason for the delay in handling this case properly for almost five years.


The Ombudsman recommends that the Office of the Police Commissioner should be responsible for the proper management and coordination of all traffic and other cases to avoid such unjustified delays in the future.



PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/other/ombudsman/2004/5.html