Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback National Court of Papua New Guinea

State v Pepa [2024] PGNC 239; N10906 (3 July 2024)

N10906

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR No. 667-672, 673-676, 678-681, 682-685, 686-689, 690-693 & 694-697 OF 2023

THE STATE

V

MATHEW PEPA, KESPA DOA, KUR PEPA, FRED ONDA, JAMES TENGOLI, SAM TRAK & JERRY KEKDI

Minj : Miviri J
2024: 19^th June, 3^rd July

CRIMINAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Extortion Section 390A CCA – Trial – Unlawfully Demanded Money – For Allegedly looking After Plantation For 4 Years – From New Owner of Plantation – Threats Issued Whilst Armed with Bush knives – Road Into Plantation Blocked with Vehicle And Armed Men With Accused – Contract For Sale of Plantation – Registration of New Owner With IPA – Accused x 7 Moneys Owing From Company – Legal Rights to – Independent Evidence Genuine Claim By Accused – Mediation By Police – Company Claim – Not Criminal Offence – Evidence Not Beyond Doubt – Not Guilty x 7 Accused – Acquitted & Discharged x7 – Bail Refunded Forthwith x7.

CRIMINAL LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Extortion Section 390A CCA – Trial – Unlawfully Demanded Money – For Allegedly looking After Plantation For 4 Years – From New Owner of Plantation – Same Matter Same Facts Subject of District Court Summary Prosecution – 3 Counts Obstruction of a Police Officer Section 60 (1) Summary Offences Act – 4 Counts for Breach of Peace Section 7 (b) Summary Offences Act – Heard Determined – 7 Charges Dismissed No Legal Basis x13 Accused – Bail Moneys x13 Accused Refunded forthwith – Section 17 CCA Former Conviction or Acquittal – Section 38 (8) Constitution – Prosecution Will Not Proceed to a Verdict – A Man Will Not Be Tried Twice for the Same Matter – Discharged & Bail Refunded x 7.

Facts
Accused together were informed by the new owner of the subject coffee Plantation that he had purchased it and was the new owner. They stopped preventing access to the plantation and allow him to run it. Accused stopped him from accessing the plantation on condition that he paid them moneys outstanding for fours years work. They did so by blocking the road into the plantation with a vehicle and used force threats whilst armed with bush knives and other offensive weapons, unless he paid them that money.

Held
New owner of Plantation
Meeting with Accused.
Outstanding moneys owed to Accused.
Demands made to New Owner to pay.
Company Liabilities outstanding wages.
Police Mediation to.
Genuine Claims for.
Civil Procedure Not Addressed completed.
Company Law.
Not Beyond all Reasonable Doubt.
Matter subject to Section 17 CCA
& Section 37 (8) Constitution
Not Guilty x7.
Acquitted x7.
Bail refunded x7.

Cases Cited:
Nugints, The State v [1994] PNGLR 493
Tiut v Towato [1956] PGSC 30 (28 May 1956)
Painke (No 2), The State v [1977] PNGLR 141

Counsel:
F, Popeu, for the State
R. Mangi, for the Defendant

VERDICT

03^rd July 2024

1. MIVIRI J: This is the verdict after trial of Mathew Pepa, Kespa Doa, Kur Pepa, Fred Onda, James Tengoli, Sam Trak and Jerry Kekdi who were all alleged to have threatened one Peter Pena the new owner of Madan Coffee and Tea Plantation, that unless he compensated and paid them for the four years, that they looked after and managed the subject plantation, they would not allow him access into it.
   
2. The following were the facts on arraignment against all seven accused. That all Accused, Mathew Pepa, Kespa Doa, Kur Pepa, Fred Onda, James Tengoli, Sam Trak and Jerry Kekdi were all employees of Madan Coffee and Tea Plantation which was owned by Highlands Arabicas Limited Company between the 1^st September 2002 up to about 28^th January 2022, when it was sold to a new owner, one Peter Pena the complainant in the allegation.
   
3. All accused are from Warike Clan, Madan village. It is the immediate area where Madan Plantation is located. Initially the Company was owned by Mr Larry Dean Hull and Mrs Aarlie Hull, a couple from USA. The former passed on in 2018 and the wife Mrs Aarlie Hull ran into problems running the Plantation, and she asked for local Managers to run it on her behalf. One of which was Jacob Koldop who She appointed as the General Manager of the Plantation. The Accused Mathew Pepa employed there as a paymaster, demanded that he be given that position, but the owner declined. So, he started causing problems within the plantation. He intimidated and threatened the other employees. He also assaulted them. This culminated in him assaulting the owner of the Company, Mrs Aarlie Hull on the 17^th May 2019, when the management was trying to pay out the employees.
   
4. She left the plantation that day for the last time staying at the McRoyal Hotel in Mt Hagen. From where she sent word the next day for local leaders from the areas surrounding the Madan Plantation to meet with her at the McRoyal Hotel. There she offered them first priority and the opportunity to purchase that plantation. By the 28^th January 2022 there was no offer by the locals to purchase the Company Highlands Arabicas Limited with all its shares and Assets including the Madan Coffee Plantation. So, it was sold by her to the Complainant Peter Pena. He informed the local leaders of that fact, but they refused to believe him and sought confirmation from Mrs Aarlie Hull. Including the Legal firm of LLL Sullivans who acted for her in the purchase of the company. They confirmed but the Accused were still not happy with the new situation. They made it known to Mr Peter Pena by getting a message to him on the 06^th February 2022 that they were waiting for him, and that there would be trouble if he tried to enter Madan Plantation.
   
5. On the 10^th February 2022, Mr Pena tried to move his team into Madan Plantation to take possession of it. But all the accused in company set up a roadblock on the road leading into Madan Plantation using a company vehicle and aided by other men from Warike Clan armed with weapons that included mainly bush knives threatened Mr Peter Pena and his men. They demanded that they pay compensation for taking care of the plantation for the four (4) years first, before they can go into the plantation. Mr Peter Pena and his team withdrew because of the threats and the unlawful demand for the compensation issued by the accused Mathew Pepa and his co Accused.
   
6. The actions of the accused contravened the provisions of section 390A of the Criminal Code upon which all were indicted with. And which section is in the following terms: - 390A. DEMANDS FOR COMPENSATION OR OTHER PAYMENT. A person who, with intent to extort or gain any thing, payment, or compensation from any person–

(a) demands the thing, payment or compensation; and
(b) in order to obtain compliance with the demand–

(i) causes or threatens to cause injury to any person or damage to any property; or
(ii) does or threatens to do any act which renders, or is likely to render any public road, bridge, navigable river or navigable channel, natural or artificial, impassable or less safe for travelling or conveying property; or
(iii) otherwise unlawfully threatens or intimidates any person,

is guilty of a crime.
Penalty: Imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years.

7. The state was required to establish beyond all reasonable doubts that each of the Accused was identified in the allegation that the State levelled as set out above. And they aided and abetted each other in that they had the intention to extort or gain anything, payment or compensation from Peter Pena, or Highlands Arabicas Limited. And this intention was manifested overt by evidence in that each demanded that thing, or payment or compensation. And that in order to obtain compliance and realize that demand, or payment or compensation, they individually, or severely, aided and abetted each other, caused or threatened to cause injury to any person, or property, otherwise unlawfully threatened, or intimidated any person to realize that fact. This must be established beyond all reasonable doubt specifically the role Mathew Pepa, Kespa Doa, Kur Pepa, Fred Onda, James Tengoli, Sam Trak and Jerry Kekdi is alleged to have played on 10^th February 2022. In similar way it must be established the role of each as named on the 22^nd February 2022 at Madan Plantation. Also, of the 11^th March 2022 and the 22^nd March 2022.
   
8. What is accepted both by the Prosecution and the Defence are that the accused are owed money of four (4) years ago because of services that they rendered to the company bought by Peter Pena. Who is a lawyer holding a Master of Laws degree who works as a consultant originally from Kuruk village, Mul District, Mt Hagen. He is a graduate of the Aiyura National High School having graduated from it in 1980 to 1981. Then he went to the University of Papua New Guinea where he undertook a law degree graduating 1985, from where he went onto the Legal Training Institute 1986 and admitting as a Lawyer. He is a consultant involved and manages and runs his own companies. No doubt he would be learned and experienced enough to follow the process of the law in securing possession of the subject plantation, Madan. Here the process that was testified to by Acting Assistant Commissioner Joe Puri of Police Southern Divisional Command was in order. That is an eviction proceeding to evict the Accused who the opinion was illegally occupying Madan Plantation. He had the title with the contract of sale and the IPA registration. It was a simple process securing an eviction order on that basis, serving it on the Police to get the Accused out of the occupation of Madan. In his evidence he acknowledged that the subject plantation was formally run by Missionary Doctors to Nazarene Mr Dean Hull and Mrs Aarlie Hull from whom he purchased the subject plantation. And the Investment Promotion Authority (IPA) Extract Exhibit P8 confirmed that Highlands Arabica Limited was a company that he held shares to as the owner. Which is further confirmed by the Sale of the Subject company to him evidenced by Exhibit P9 Contract of sale of the Company to him as purchaser. He flew to Mt Hagen on the 03^rd February 2022 to set up the subject plantation Madan.
   
9. After meeting with all the accused except for James Tengoli at the Airport Resort Hotel, it remained clear that unless and until settlement of the wages outstanding incurred over the four years, when the plantation was looked after by the Accused and accomplices, Peter Pena would not enter Madan Plantation. Several attempts to enter the subject plantation did not materialize in his favour. But eventually a meeting ensued where He depicted out by the display of the 500ml water container with its water intact that he bought the subject company and plantation with what was inside it. He is the owner and therefore is responsible having purchased it to offset what is owed within. He has not pointed to the evidence in the Contract of sale of the company as to what was sold and bought. It is not clear if only the assets of the Company were sold and bought and not the liabilities. Which include the outstanding wages if not paid off. They became liabilities of the subject company. And the sale price would no doubt include liabilities. It has come in evidence that Peter Pena bought it for K5 million. The contract of sale has not been specifically set out as to what was paid for comprising that amount. But the evidence of Peter Pena is that he was going to follow it up with Mrs Aarlie Hull to secure their payment. This evidence in my view establishes a genuine cause accepted by both parties to the dispute that it was outstanding necessary to be settled. It was underpinning the administration of the Company. It could not be swept aside in the fact that there was a new owner to the subject company. He was responsible for its settlement and that is why it was taken out voiced to him by the Accused. In this regard it gives legitimacy to the conduct of the Accused in the way they demanded what was in law due to them from the hands of that company and plantation purchased by Peter Pena. He has not taken the pain to show evidence to the contrary. In my view he has taken the company with its liabilities that includes the outstanding wages inherited in the sale. So, for our purposes here the accused were not knocking on a door that was closed, nor could it be held illegal against them. And it could not give amount to extortion within section 390A of the Criminal Code against all. Is it illegal to demand what is due to you in law by contract having discharged your part to the company who must honour its side of the bargain, contract. What was done was for consideration that was not discharged by the Company to the claimants. It was a matter within the new owner and management to take up and settle. It is uncontested accepted fact by both State and defence. And which is the reason for the demands made to Peter Pena by the Accused at that meeting initially.
   
10. Hence it was not an illegal matter sought out for its settlement upon the new owner Peter Pena by the Accused. They had a lien that warranted settlement because the company had benefitted from what they did. This is a fact that is accepted by both sides to the dispute. It is the origine of this matter. Had it not been attended satisfactorily by the new owner; it would not have led to all that has happened. They were entitled to place it before him for settlement. It was incurred accepted by both sides because of the operation necessary for the company. Here therefore mutual dialogue and mediation of the matter was necessary to appease all, and to find a solution. And the evidence of Acting Assistant Commissioner of Police Southern Command Joe Puri was relevant. Drawing Police into the matter was not the solution to the matter. Justice and fairness did not lie in the engagement of Police. Because it was suppressing the voice and the rights of the accused. So that the owner Peter Pena would stand in favour. He had conducted two mediations as Acting Assistant Commissioner of Police in the Mt Hagen Police Station. One of which had turned into argument between the parties, accused and the complainant immediately at the police Station after they had left his office.
    
11. In my view his evidence is the truth as he saw it hinged in his view to seek out Justice and fairness in the matter. He is a very experienced police officer of 30 years unblemished service to the nation. His first service in his own Province when he was stationed here. His evidence is untainted by any motive or is inclined to one or the other side, but of eliciting the truth so that Justice flows. I am minded to accept his evidence because of these reasons and after observing his demeanour in the witness box as he recounted his evidence. I find no reason to doubt the veracity of his evidence. I hold him to have told the truth as it unfolded before his view and participation. I am inclined to accept his evidence that this was not a police matter. It was not a criminal matter. It could not be the subject of Police participation. The least that could be done was to mitigate the matter. Lives needed to be protected and the subject property was a commercial property that was to be protected in view of what was happening around to similar establishments within the Western Highlands. That in my view is a government civil servant concerned about the welfare of the surrounding, the province, and the Country. He resorted to ensure fairness and Justice. His evidence therefore will determine whether the criminal offence of extortion pursuant to section 390A of the Criminal Code was ever committed by each of the seven Accused.
    
12. I am inclined to follow that it is proper for mediation as it was a commercial matter not a criminal matter. A company was sold to a new owner upon whose hands lay the wages that had been incurred in the operations of the Company. How would it be that the vendor was responsible for these, and not the purchaser? No evidence was led by the new owner that this was the case. And in his case, it would have made sense being a lawyer to point to the contract of sale, that it did not include the liabilities which remained with the former owners. He opted in his wisdom not to do that here when he gave evidence. It was not wrong for the Accused led by Mathew Pepa to follow up the outstanding wages. So, the voice of Acting Assistant Commissioner of Police Joe Puri was right that Police could not be used to suppress the accused in what was due to them. In contract it was enforceable because the processing of coffee cherries, set out by the evidence of Mathew Pepa had benefitted the company. And it was upon the new owner to seriously look at what was placed before him on the occasions at the airport resort hotel and then later to cut what was looming and is now evident here.
    
13. This is also the evidence of Jacob Koldop originally from Mt Hagen Central who worked with Highlands Arabica Limited at Madan Plantation as its Field Operations Manager. He was a continuing employee employed there by the former owners Mrs Aarlie Hull. And he was employed by her since 2010. She has since left the company and went in May 2019. She had come on a fortnight with money from the office down the valley to pay the workers. When Mathew Pepa the Accused came to the gate accompanied by another person and pushed her out of the gate. Mathew Pepa took the bag containing K109, 000.00 which he later handed to them after much talk. And the workers were paid as a result. As a result of this Mrs Aarlie Hull left with two other Americans from Rotary who were resident with her to the McRoyal Hotel. From there she called a meeting asking and inviting the locals first priority to purchase the plantation from her. In that meeting also she appointed the witness as Interim General Manager of the company. In addition, she appointed one Amos Papa as Mill Manager. Angra Pawa as Security Manager, Johnny Mapi as Works Manager and Mathew Pepa as field Manager.
    
14. His evidence of the illegal and unlawful conduct of Mathew Pepa has been denied by the latter. The fact of the matter is that there is no other independent evidence that would sway that extortion has been made out on the evidence of Jacob Koldop. In fact, the contrary can be proved based on the evidence of Acting Assistant Commissioner of Police Southern Command Joe Puri. The use of the police was not warranted, given that this was a dispute within the company owner management and those who had been taking care of the subject plantation in the absence of the former owner, gone finish to the USA. If it was as bad as depicted by Jacob Koldop’s evidence, the plantation and company would be in no position to be sold.
    
15. Its value was maintained to the level drawing the money that was paid for in its sale because of what is depicted out in the record of interview of the Accused, Mathew Pepa Exhibit P2(a) Pidgin Original version, and the English translation Exhibit P2 (b) conducted on Wednesday 06^th April 2022 with Police Detective Sergeant F Arpa, corroborated by Detective First Constable Joe Pius. He is 34 years old from Madan side at the subject plantation, from Anglimb District Jiwaka Province. He has been to school attaining grade 5 at Avi Primary School. He works as a Paymaster after helping and working with Larry Hull. He is married with three children. And is of the AOG Church. He has admitted that he demanded for the payment of what was due to him and the others for work put into the subject plantation in the absence of Managers and the owners. That whatever money was made in the absence of the owners and Managers was paid in the operation of the Company. He did not benefit from it in any way. And he admits attending the subject meeting that was called by Peter Pena at the Airport Resort Hotel. And he voiced as to the payment due and owing to them for looking after the plantation. And denies that he made demands for the position of General Manager upon Mrs Aarlie Hull because his education level did not allow. Nor did he pushed and threatened her to leave Papua New Guinea. Because he is a practising Christian. Because there was no money, and he admits they picked coffee and milled them. They were not paid their fortnightly wages a long time going into 4, 5, 6 months without any wages paid. He helped to try to get the plantation operational. There were two Nissan vehicles he got one to use in organizing the work and it was at the discretion of the Factory Manager allowing him the use of that vehicle. That he never snatched the money bag of K107, 000.00 in fact he took possession of it because he had generated it in the way coffee was picked milled and sold. But he gave it all back. And he took possession of the Nissan HAJ 522 vehicle of the plantation Madan because the Security Manager Angra Pawa took it out to sell it. And that he used it in the company area for work of the company there.
    
16. This evidence does not see what is set out by the State evidence. And this is the plantation Madan that has operated way back to 1987 in the evidence of Kespa Doa which coupled with the evidence of James Tengoli, Kur Pepa, and Mathew Pepa has drawn benefits to the People of Madan who are immediate residents of that area and the land. It is their land benefitting them with spin offs. Their women folk are able to sell to the workers and immediate residents of the company so that they earn their wellbeing. They would not go to the extreme of damaging it and causing it to suffer so that they also suffer in the process. In other words, they would not cut off the hand that is feeding them. Each Accused is an elderly person accused and have in no unspecific terms stated that that would be the last thing on our mind to do. All have agreed to meeting Peter Pena the new owner of that plantation. And this meeting was at the Airport Resort Hotel at Kagamuga where he informed all accused except for James Tengoli of that fact that he had purchased the subject Plantation, Madan. He was the new owner. And wanted to work harmoniously with them and any problems he would look to address so that the plantation ran smoothly.
    
17. That is the assertion in question 25 of the record of interview of the accused Kur Pepa, Exhibit P2(a) Pidgin original version and the English translation Exhibit P2(b). He confirms that labourers worked without payment for four (4) years. It does not advance the cause of the indictment in the State’s favour pertaining to all four counts that are preferred against him.
    
18. Similarly, the record of interview of the accused Kespa Doa. Exhibit P3(a) Pidgin version, and the English translation Exhibit P3(b) with all the denials and asking Peter Pena to produce the black and white pertaining to the ownership of the plantation and the Company does not advance the cause of the state. It does not advance all four counts on the indictment in favour of the State.
    
19. It is the same in Exhibit P4(a) pidgin version, and exhibit P4(b) the record of interview of the accused Fred Onda who denies going to the roadblock per the evidence of Peter Pena. There is no independent evidence to verify that indeed he was at this roadblock in the way that has been described by Peter Pena. This doubt is not remedied by the evidence of Acting Assistant Commissioner of Police Southern Divisional Command Joe Puri. His evidence corroborates the assertion of the defence more. These doubts in my view do not advance the state cause against him on the indictment preferred of all four counts preferred.
    
20. Similar holding and determination will follow in the case after consideration of the record of interview of James Tengoli Exhibits P5(a) Pidgin original version, English translation exhibit P5(b) there are very serious doubts that undermine the indictment preferred against him on all counts.
    
21. I make similar observation and determination after due consideration of Exhibit P6(a) Pidgin original version, and English translation Exhibit P6(b) of the record of interview of the accused Sam Trak. He was at Church question 16, which has not been established otherwise by the evidence led by the State. The four counts on the indictment do not go the way that the State has urged.
    
22. It would follow similar after consideration of Exhibit P7(a) pidgin original version and English translation exhibit P7(b) of the record of interview of the accused Jerry Kekdi who said he was in Mt Hagen Town question 16 therein. He also does not have the four counts on the indictment in favour of the State because of this doubt.
    
23. The ultimatum is upon the State to establish that the Accused have committed Extortion. That they have wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or intimidation to gain money or property from an individual or entity. Extortion generally involves a threat being made to the victim’s person or property, or to their family or friends. This is a case that has arisen in the way it has because of a dispute of payment of wages salaries that have been outstanding owed to the Plantation Labourers. It is a commercial matter pertaining to that company Highlands Arabica Limited. It is liabilities of that company due its workers, the labourers. Which was voiced to Mr Peter Pena by the Accused. It was voiced to him because he was now the new owner by the contract of Sale and shares and name of the company registered with Investment Promotion Authority. That is affirmed by the witnesses Jacob Koldop, and James Tengoli, Kur Pepa, and by the description so brilliantly laid out by Peter Pena holding up the 500ml of water in a bottle. And which reply was that he would take it up with Aarlie Hull. That he would make it his worth to see out Aarlie Hull for that payment to be made. Because that payment was not made workers took to the extreme by blocking the road into the Plantation. It is not extortion by section 390A discharged beyond all reasonable doubt.
    
24. Even if it were the State is handicapped and has a steep incline to rest is cause defined out by clear breach and defiance of section 17 Former conviction or acquittal of the criminal Code Act. Which is aggravated and compounded by the application of section 37 (8) of the Constitution, in that the same matter, same allegations arising from the same facts was the subject of information under section 7 (b) threatening words whereby a breach of the peace was likely to take place of the Summary Offences Act. And of section 60 (1) also of that Act of hindering a policeman in the execution of their lawful duty. This is explicit by the Judgement and orders made by the Minj District Court presided by Senior Provincial Magistrate D. Simiji. It relates to the same Madan Plantation on the complaint made by Peter Pena “learned Lawyer by profession should have issued notice to the named defendants, afterwards upon expiry of given notice period file simple summary ejectment proceedings in the District Court instead of dragging police into the Mandan Plantation issues prematurely on persistent and pre-existing land and land ownership and related issues on the Mandan Plantation which he alleged to have bought from a white man alleged owner.... It was clearly weaponised (used as weapons) against them in bad faith and to pursue a flawed complaint in all. Therefore, all seven charges shall be dismissed as the Police were dragged into this feud prematurely without the land and other underlying legal issued properly being made out in law and due process.”
    
25. The court issued the following orders; - “(1) This charge including all 6 other charges laid against the named thirteen (13) defendants Kespa Doa, Jerry Kekdy, Sam Trak, Kur Pepa, Emmanuel Kuri, Mathew Pepa, Junior Pawa, Saki Kespa, Pit Komb, Fred Honda Pais Wai, James Tengoli and Steward Pais shall be dismissed forthwith for abusing State and Police Powers by Jiwaka and Mt Hagen Police at the ACP Level against ordinary citizens.

(2) The very Senior Police Officers of Jiwaka and Mt Hagen led by the then ACP Highlands Eastern End Divisional Commander Chief Superintendent Joesph Tondop did not act in enforcing a proper and lawful court order and therefore was tantamount to abuse of Police powers.
(3) The land or landowner related investments were not properly dealt with.
(4) There was not even a single property being destroyed and or damaged by the alleged Defendants including their other kinsmen warranting direct police intervention in the nature that occurred on misconceived complaint invoking police powers triggering the incidents which generated all the seven (7) charges.
(5) The multiple charges mounted by Police against each Defendant on the same set of facts are improper, unfair and tantamount to Police deliberately abusing their powers outside due process of law.
(6) Therefore the 7 charges laid against each of the 13 Defendants shall be dismissed forthwith for being legally flawed and premised on abuse of powers of the police force against ordinary citizens and further abuse of proper lawful process by a learned lawyer.
(7) The defendants respective bail money shall be refunded forthwith to each defendant upon presentation of each of their receipts to the State Treasury.
(8) The file shall be closed.”

26. The orders are issued dated 20^th June 2024. All are in essence subject deposed to by the affidavit of James Tengoli sworn of the 21^st June 2024 where information laid against these named accused including others to a total of thirteen (13) Accused whose charges were determined in the orders set out above. It means in law there is nothing that will stand if dealt with in law by a due process of law already. No man will be tried twice on the same matter. Here election has been made on the same facts’ circumstances involving the same witnesses’ parties principally to the cause of action now proceeded as a very serious case of extortion pursuant to section 390A. It was elected to be dealt with as a summary matter under the Summary offences Act with police as complainants. The accused all in my view have been subjected to persecution and in defiance of the criminal Code as well as the Constitutional provision set out above. They follow in similar foothold of Nugints, The State v [1994] PNGLR 493. Election has been made to proceed summarily and a verdict pronounced. It will not be lawful to pursue as is the case here. The Indictment does not stand in law considered, Tiut v Towato [1956] PGSC 30 (28 May 1956). What has happened here is clearly an abuse of process and must be stopped with the discharge of all accused from the Indictment forthwith, Painke (No 2) The State v [1977] PNGLR 141.
    
27. The aggregate is that there is no room for the Indictment to proceed with all four counts against all seven (7) accused. In the case of Mathew Pepa that also includes count five (5) on unlawful use of motor vehicle. There are serious doubts set out above against all seven (7) Accused individually and severely on all four counts preferred, and the fifth count against Mathew Pepa. There is one verdict open in all on the Indictment dated the 18^th June 2024 in favour of all seven (7) Accused.
    
28. All are Not Guilty of all four counts of extortion pursuant to section 390A against all seven (7) Accused. And in the case of count five (5) not Guilty against Mathew Pepa. Consequently, all bail moneys are ordered refunded against all accused upon presentation of original receipts.
    

Orders Accordingly
__________________________________________________________________
Public Prosecutor: Lawyer for the State
Public Solicitor : Lawyer for the Defendant