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

State v Ramatau [2017] FJMC 61; Traffic Case 27.2015 (2 May 2017)

IN THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA

Traffic Case No: - 27/2015

STATE

V

SIMIONE RAMATAU

For the Prosecution: Cpl Shaw

The accused: Ms.A.Prakash (LAC)

Date of Sentence: 02^nd of May 2017

SENTENCE

1. SIMIONE RAMATAU , you were convicted after a hearing to one count of Dangerous Driving Causing Death contrary to sections 97(1) (2) (c ) and 114 of the Land Transport Act No 35 of 1998.
2. During the hearing the following facts were proved. On 21st January 2015 you drove your vehicle at Lami in a dangerous manner causing death of one Verenaisi Buka Soloika. At that time you were not only driving your vehicle in excessive speed, but you were aware there was some defect in the vehicle. These factors led to this accident.
3. The maximum penalty for Dangerous Driving Causing Death is imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of $10,000 with the minimum being a fine of $1,000 and minimum disqualification for 6 months and maximum up to life.
4. In Sharma v The State [2005] FJHC 464; HAA0097J.2005S her Ladyship Justice Shameem said: "In 1998 Parliament passed the Land Transport Authority Act, and increased penalty for causing death by dangerous driving to 10 years imprisonment. There can be no clearer Parliamentary intention as to sufficiency of penalty. To reflect such Parliamentary intention, I held in Iowane Waqairatavo that the tariff for such offences must increase to 2 to 4 years imprisonment".
5. In Laisiasa Koroivuki v the State [2013] FJCA 15; AAU0018.2010 (5 March 2013) his Lordship Justice Goundar discussed the guiding principles for determining the starting point in sentencing in the following manner: "In selecting a starting point, the court must have regard to an objective seriousness of the offence. No reference should be made to the mitigating and aggravating factors at this time. As a matter of good practice, the starting point should be picked from the lower or middle range of the tariff. After adjusting for the mitigating and aggravating factors, the final term should fall within the tariff. “
   6. Considering the nature of offending, I select 03 years as your starting point.
   7. There are no aggravating factors. In her written mitigation your counsel submitted the following :
      1. First offender;
      2. 43 years old;
      100. Married with children;
      4. Seeking forgiveness.
   8. For the above mitigating factors I deduct 06 months to reach 2 ½ years’ imprisonment.
   9. Even though being a driver of 10 years’ experience you elected to drive a vehicle with defect in a public road. Further you drove this vehicle in an excessive speed in rainy weather which directly caused this accident. Hence your callous disregard of other road users on that day needs to be denounced. Even though in your mitigation you submitted a custodial sentence in this case would have a detrimental effect in your wife and the children, after serving this sentence you would be back with them. But unfortunate reality is that you have deprived a husband his wife and children their mother from that day. At least this sentence would show them that justice has served and would be a message to other drivers to be more responsible and cautious in the public roads.
   10. SIMIONE RAMATAU, I sentence you to 2 ½ years imprisonment for this charge with a non-parole period of 02 years. Further you are disqualified from driving for 03 years effective from today.
   11. 28 days to appeal.

Shageeth Somaratne

Resident Magistrate