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

State v WK (Juvenile) [2026] PGNC 64; N11741 (11 March 2026)

N11741

PAPUA NEW GUINEA
[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR NO (JJ) 49 OF 2025

THE STATE

v

WK (Juvenile)
Defendant

KIMBE: ANDELMAN J

3, 10, 11 MARCH 2026

CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – plea of guilty – aggravated robbery – s 386(1) & (2)(a)(b) and (c) of the Criminal Code Act -application of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014 – 14-year old offender – restrictions on use of custodial sentences - s 81 - community concerns – high prevalence of juvenile offending – suspension of sentence - probation

Cases cited

Acting Public Prosecutor v Don Hale [1998] SC564
Avia Aihi v The State (No.3) [1982] PNGLR 92
Gimble v The State [1988-1989] PNGLR 271
Golu v The State [1979] PNGLR 653
Lialu v The State [1990] PNGLR 486
State v JH (Juvenile) [2025] N11173
State v IW (Juvenile) [2021] N9118
State v DT & AH (Juveniles) [2025] N11407
State v MN CR (JJ) 746 of 2025
The State v Kaka [2021] PGNC 309; N9120
The State v Ronald Burua [2021] PGNC; N9957
The State v Liliura [2014] N5785
The State v Katu [2025] PGNC 96; N11215
The State v Clyde Ata [2023] PGNC; N10806
Ure Hane v The State [1984] PNGLR 105

Counsel

Mr A Bray for the State
Mr D Rhem on 3 March 2026 and Mr N Loloma on 6 March 2026 for the offender

1. ANDELMAN J: On 21 November 2025 the offender was convicted on one count of robbery under s 386(1) & (2)(a)(b) and (c) of the Criminal Code Act after he pleaded guilty to the crime. The court was satisfied, based on the disposition presented by the State that the charge was sufficiently made out against him.
   

BRIEF STATEMENT OF FACTS

2. The juvenile pleaded guilty to the following material facts.
   
   1. On 22 February 2025 at Kimbe Talasea, West New Britain Province (the offender) stole from:
      1. Person 1 with threats of actual violence a speaker and two touch screen phones to the value of about K1 400.
      2. Person 1 with threats of actual violence a television, an iron and a playbox to the value of about K1 100.
   2. The juvenile was in the company of others and they were armed with dangerous and offence (sic) weapons namely homemade firearms and knives contravening section 386(1) & (2) (a)(b) and (c) of the Criminal Code. Section 7(1)(a)(b) & (c) of the Criminal Code was invoked.
      

ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT

3. The question before the court is to determine an appropriate sentence for the juvenile according to law and in consideration of all relevant circumstances.
   
4. As the offender is a juvenile (14 years old) when he committed the offence, he must be sentenced according to the objectives of sentencing and guiding principles under Part VII of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014.
5. The maximum penalty prescribed by the legislature should be reserved for the worst type or worst category of the offence under consideration. Each case is to be determined on its own peculiar facts and circumstances and the court has a wide discretion under s 19 of the Criminal Code in determining the proper sentence. Sentencing discretion must be exercised on proper principles. These include the characteristics of the offence or the offender which may aggravate or mitigate the seriousness of the crime taken together with all other relevant considerations. Golu v The State [1979] PNGLR 653; Avia Aihi v The State (No.3) [1982] PNGLR 92; Ure Hane v The State [1984] PNGLR 105); Lialu v The State [1990] PNGLR 486.
   

ANTECEDENTS

6. The offender had no prior offences. The offender was 14 years at the time of the offence. The offender studied at school and resided in a house in Kimbe with his family. The offender is the second born of three siblings.
   

ALLOCATUS

7. The offender said it was his first offence. He said that his parents were unemployed and that he needed money for school fees. He was sorry for what he has done. He was sorry for breaking the law of the country and promised to never offend in the future. He was sorry that he gave a bad name to his community and family. He was sorry to god. He asked the court to consider putting him on probation so that he could continue his education at school. He said that the prison was overcrowded and that he did not sleep or eat properly.
   

THE OFFENCE

8. Section 376 is in the following terms:
   

(1) A person who commits robbery is guilty of a crime.

(2) If a person charged with an offence against Subsection (1)—

(a) is armed with a dangerous or offensive weapon or instrument; or

(b) is in company with one or more other persons; or

(c) at, immediately before or immediately after, the time of the robbery, wounds or uses any other personal violence to any person,

he is liable to be sentenced to life imprisonment and is eligible for parole after 30 years.

SENTENCING A JUVENILE

9. It is an object of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014 at s 5(a) to establish a process for restorative justice, Melanesian tradition and contemporary justice practices. As Kaumi J stated in State v JH (Juvenile) 2025 N11173 at [64], the spirit and intent of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014 is to assist juveniles ‘to become good, responsible and contributing members’ of their community and society.
   
10. There are four purposes and principles of sentencing set out in s 76 of the Act. These are; to ensure the protection of the community, secondly to encourage and promote a juvenile focused approach by engaging with the juvenile so that they can understand and take responsibility for their conduct and the resulting consequences, thirdly by considering the juvenile’s individual needs and fourthly by being family and community centric, that is, by the promotion of reintegrating the juvenile back into an environment where they are supported and nurtured.
    
11. Section 76(2) requires a court to pass a sentence that is least restrictive that is capable of purposes set out in subsection (1).
    
12. In determining the length of the sentence the court must have regard for the twelve factors are set out in s 77 of the Act. The court may also take into account other factors. In determining a sentence there is a need for an individual approach and the court is not strictly bound by precedent.
    
13. Section 81(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014 imposes an obligation on the court to consider all alternatives to a custodial sentence prior to imposing a term of imprisonment as a last resort, for the shortest period possible where there are no reasonable alternatives; State v SY (A Juvenile) [2021] PGNC 242; N8924; Berrigan J at [18].
    
14. Section 81(2)(b) restricts a court sentencing a juvenile to a correctional institution unless it is satisfied that the institution has appropriate facilities for the imprisonment of the juvenile.
    
15. Section 80 of the Act gives the court a broad and extensive list of options to consider once the court finds that a juvenile is guilty of an offence. The list gives a practical effect to the object of the Act which is to deal with juveniles in a Melanesian tradition in consideration of contemporary justice measures such as mentoring, counselling, the use of education and training as well as prevention and rehabilitation programs.
    

SUBMISSIONS

16. The defense counsel submitted that some of the stolen items were returned, that the juvenile did not plan to rob the victims and that it was due to peer group pressure that he was in the wrong company at the time of the commission of the crime. It was submitted that the offender is sorry for what he has done. In light of the mitigating factors, the Pre-Sentence Report and the sentencing guidelines, the defence submitted for a sentence of eight years to be partly or wholly suspended with probationary conditions for supervision.
    
17. The State submitted that the offender acted in a group that was armed with dangerous weapons. The offence occurred at night, that there was a threat to others, that a young female was forced from the house. There is a high prevalence of this offence and West New Britain Province is a hotspot. Rehabilitation should be considered because the offender is a juvenile, but juveniles cannot engage in criminal activity and expect to be given a ‘gold pass’ just because they are juveniles. Things need to be weighted up properly. Juveniles and young offenders are the main offenders in very serious crimes in PNG. The State submits that the sentence should be 12 to 15 years.
    
18. The State and the defense referred to numerous comparable cases of aggravated robbery involving adults and a single case involving a juvenile.
    
19. The State and the defence agreed that sentencing guideline for robbery of a house falls in category 1, for which the starting point is 10 years; Gimble v The State [1988-1989] PNGLR 271; The State v Liliura [2014] N5785.
    
20. In State v MN CR(JJ) 746 of 2025 (18 June 2025) Cooper J, The 16 year old offender was in the company of others and armed with dangerous and offensive weapons. The offense was a robbery of a house at night. The victims were threatened with weapons and the house was ransacked. The offender was sentenced to four years, pre-trial custody deducted; partial suspension of two years. The juvenile served one year 4 months and 28 days.
    
21. In The State v Burua [2021] PGNC; N9957, the offender pleaded guilty to one count of robbery with aggravating circumstances. The victims were held at gun point at a school and items such as mobile phones and a speaker were stollen. The offender was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment with less time served.
22. In The State v Kaka [2021] PGNC 309; N9120, 10 years was imposed on the offenders. In that case, the armed offenders broke into the home of elderly victims in the middle of the night, smashed one the victim’s face with a home made gun and stole goods to the value of about K50 000.
    
23. In Acting Public Prosecutor v Don Hale [1998] SC564 the offender who was armed was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
    
24. In State v Mingara (2018) PGNC N7450 the offender being armed, in the company of others showed fake identification cards to the guards went inside the building, stole cash, a laptop and two mobiles to the sum of K92,000. He was sentenced to seven years less time spent in custody with 1 and 6 months suspended.
    
25. In State v Ata (2023) PGNC N10806 the offender being armed held up a woman and her son on the street armed with a knife. The offender cut the victim with a knife on the hand and head. A sentence of 4 years was imposed with 2 years suspended.
    

CONSIDERATION

26. The maximum penalty for robbery, s 386 of the Criminal Code Act is life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after 30 years.
    
27. The starting point for an adult for robbery of a house falls in category 1, for which is a 8 to 10 years sentence; Gimble v The State [1988-1989] PNGLR 271; The State v Liliura [2014] N5785.
    
28. For juveniles the starting point for a sentencing range is lower; State v IW (Juvenile) [2021] N9118 [37]. For a charge of murder the sentencing range is 60% to 70% of the adult sentencing range, although there is no range or guide that applies to juveniles generally.
    
29. There are good reasons why children cannot be treated the same as adults committing the same crime. In juveniles, the prefrontal cortex part of the brain that controls executive functioning is still developing. Children and young people do not have fully developed cognitive processes required in planning controlling impulses and weighing up the consequences of decisions before acting; David P. Farrington, Hannah Gaffney and Howard White 2022 “Effectiveness of 12 types of interventions in reducing juvenile offending and anti-social behaviour” Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice (2022) 64(4) cited in Sotiri, M; Schetzer, L; Kerr, A (2024) Children, Youth Justice and Alternatives to Incarceration in Australia, Justice Reform Initiative, Australia pg 25.
    
30. I set out some recent sentences involving juveniles below.
    
31. In State v DT & AH (Juveniles) [2025] PGNC 242; N11384 two juveniles were sentenced to 5 years and 3 years respectively. The charge was possession of a dangerous drug. Offender DT was incinerated for 1 year and 5 months and served the rest of the sentence on a suspended sentence. Offender AH was incinerated for 1 year and 5 months and served the rest of the sentence on a suspended sentence.
    
32. In State v IW (A Juvenile) [2021] N9118 a juvenile who pleaded guilty to murder was sentenced 10 years imprisonment with two years suspended with a probationary order on release.
    
33. In State v JH (A Juvenile) [2025] N911173 a juvenile who pleaded guilty to sexual penetration of a four year old relative was sentenced 5 years in custody. An offence under s 229A of the Criminal Code carries a life sentence. Kaume J found that the offence was deliberate, callous and premeditated. The injury to the victim child’s genitalia was a substantial aggravating factor.
    
34. In this case, Kaume J was concerned that he had limited capacity to consider the issue of a suspended sentence because there was a lack of available support or services for any meaningful rehabilitation.
    
35. In State v DA (A Juvenile) [2024] PGNC 84; N10730 a juvenile pleaded guilty to two counts of unlawfully causing grievous bodily harm armed with dangerous and offensive weapons being homemade guns, a factory-made gun, wire catapults, bush knives, and iron rod bars. The offender approached and struck a victim on his left jaw with a bush knife causing an injury.
    
36. He was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months wholly suspended. The court made an additional order that included that the offender pay the victim K5 000, be on a good behavior bond, report to a Probation Officer and for the Probation Officer to prepare a report to submit to the Court at the end of each six-month period on the progress of compliance with the above conditions and rehabilitation of the offender.
    
37. In State v SY (A Juvenile) [2021] PGNC 242; N8924 a juvenile was sentenced to 4 years wholly suspended with community service for causing grievous bodily harm by stabbing the victim to the back of the right shoulder, penetrating to the chest.
    
38. Berrigan J went on to make the following additional orders:
    

The juvenile:

(a) is placed under the care and supervision of his parents to monitor and guide his behaviour, with whom he shall reside until he turns 18;

(b) perform unpaid community service work under the supervision of the Juvenile Justice Service, which may be conducted at his church, on Sundays, every week, for 6 months as permitted under s 82;

(c) must keep peace and be of good behaviour during the period of his probation.

Pursuant to s.80(3) of the Act, failure to comply with the conditions of probation will see the term of imprisonment imposed automatically take effect.

39. In State v G O (A Juvenile) [2023] PGNC 314; N10477 a juvenile was with other youths. They were under the influence of alcohol and got into a fight with another group of youths. The victim, a police officer and other policemen intervened and stopped the fight. He told the offender and his group to go home but the offender swore at him. Hearing this the victim alighted from the police vehicle he was in to ask the prisoner why he swore at him. As soon as he stepped out of the vehicle, the prisoner punched him in the mouth with a clipper (knuckle buster), knocking him unconscious. The prisoner then fled the scene. The victim lost 4 of his front teeth as a result of the assault.
    
40. Toliken J deferred the sentence upon the juvenile entering into probation for a period of 2 years with conditions that he resides with family, reports to police and is of good behaviour.
    

Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act Considerations

41. In considering the head sentence for the offence, I take into account the factors set out in s 77 of the Act.
    

The seriousness of the offence and the circumstances in which it was committed

42. The offenders were masked and armed on entering the home at about 10 pm. The two occupants, Person 1 and Person 2 were held up using a bright flashing light to disorient them causing temporary blurriness. The offenders stole goods to the value of about K 2,500. The victims were threatened with harm but were not harmed during the robbery.
    
43. The offence is very serious carrying with it a maximum sentence of life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after 30 years.
    

The degree of participation of the juvenile in the commission of the offence

44. The juvenile was not involved in the planning of the commission of the offence. The offender did not plan to rob the victims. He decided to participate due to peer group pressure.
    

The harm done to the victim and whether it was intentional or reasonably foreseeable

45. The harm done to the victims was intentional and foreseeable. The incident has had a significant emotional and psychological impact on the victims which will continue. The victims had their home broken into by a group of armed masked men threatening violence against them in the late evening. They had their personal items stolen to the value of about K2 500. The victims had their sense of security and safety shattered.
    

The age, maturity, education, health, character and attitude of the juvenile

46. The juvenile was 14 years old at the time of the offence. He was in grade 6. The juvenile reported being healthy. The juvenile acknowledged his involvement in the offending and took responsibility for his actions. He expressed remorse for harm caused to the victims and admitted that his behaviour was wrong and unlawful. He stated that the offending occurred under poor judgement and now recognised the seriousness of the consequence. He blamed his co-offenders for pressurising him to take part in the offending.
    

The juvenile's previous history in respect of offences and his or her responses to previous orders in relation to those offences

47. The juvenile has no previous criminal history.
    

The community services and facilities that are available to assist the juvenile and his or her willingness to use those services or facilities

48. The School Principal is aware of the juvenile’s offending and is prepared to help reintegrate him back into school. The Pre-Sentence Report records that he has seen some positive change to other children who have been given a second chance of education.
    
49. The Pastor at the offender’s church stated that the juvenile was an active member, took part in cricket and that the Pastor was committed to supporting the juvenile and understood the unique challenges individuals may face in the community. He offered counseling and guidance.
    

Any proposals that the juvenile or his or her parents may put forward for the future improvement of the juvenile

50. The parents stated that the juvenile would live with them, that they would send the juvenile to school and pay for his upkeep. They stated that the juvenile was active in the local church and that he could perform some community service, there. They asked to the court to consider a non custodian sentence.
    

Any views of a juvenile justice officer in relation to the juvenile

51. The probation officer expressed the view that the juvenile would require further structured guidance and counselling to reinforce accountability and prevent future offending and that he needed proper supervision and rehabilitation.
    

Any views of any person who is involved in the education or custody of the juvenile

52. I have already set out above the views of the school principal and the church Pastor.
    

Information contained in a pre-sentencing report

53. The Pre-Sentence Report includes the following content:
    
    1. The offender’s offending is not supported by his family but is rather peer related. His father works in private security and his mother sells betel nut at the main market. The offender relies on his parents for all financial needs.
    2. The offender’s mother makes sure that the offender is present in the house at night during bedtime and that the offender listens to her and carries out what is required of him. At the time of the offence she thought he was already asleep with his grandfather but failed to check in on him. When the offender’s parents were told about the offender’s involvement in the offence the following day, the defender’s father told his younger brother to take him to the police station and counseled him to avoid peer group pressure. When other offenders escaped from police custody, the offender remained behind.
    100. The offender had a high interest in attending school.
    4. The family are willing to pay up to K2000 in compensation if ordered reconciliation.
    5. The victims, Person 1 and Person 2 have suffered significantly. They lost valuable household property which has caused ongoing financial strain and emotional distress.

Any sentencing recommendations made by a community based conference

54. No community based conference occurred.
    

Any time spent by the juvenile in custody on remand in relation to the offence

55. The juvenile has been in custody since 24 March 2025.
    

CONCLUSION AS TO LENGTH OF SENTENCE

56. The offender pleaded guilty. The offender is at the lowest spectrum of liability. Section 81(2)(a)(i) of the Juvenile Justice Act restricts the use of custodial sentences at all if the child is less than 14 years of age. The offender made threats of actual violence. He acted in a group who were armed with a firearm and bush knives, The offence is highly prevalent in the Province and the victims were traumatized by the offending and have suffered economically.
    
57. I consider the juvenile’s expression of remorse to be genuine. He did not plan to be involved in armed robbery on the evening of 22 February 2025. It was an unpremeditated decision based on peer group pressure. There was nothing callous or violent alleged in his presence specifically. Some of the stolen goods have been returned to the victims. His family handed him to the police when they found out about his offending and when others escaped from the police station he stayed behind.
    
58. I have considered the matters in s 77 and the cases cited by counsel. Considering the circumstances of the case, the lack of offender’s prior offending and weighing the factors for and against, I consider that the juvenile is sentenced to 4 years imprisonment for the offence of aggravated robbery.
    

TIME SERVED

59. There is a discretion pursuant to s 3(2) of the Criminal Justice (Sentences) Act 1986 to consider that the pre-sentence period in custody be deducted from the head sentence.
    
60. The juvenile has spent 352 days in pre-trial custody.
    
61. I consider that the pre-sentence period in custody be deducted from the head sentence.
    

WHETHER ALL OR PART OF THE SENTENCE SHOULD BE SUSPENDED

62. Section 19(6) of the Criminal Code permits the court to suspend a sentence on the offender entering into a recognizance.
63. Section 81 of the Juvenile Justice Act places restrictions on the use of custodial sentences. A court must not impose a sentence of custody or imprisonment unless the court has considered and determined that there are no reasonable alternative measures under s 80 of the Act. I consider in this case that there are other reasonable alternatives to imposing a sentence of custody under s 80 of the Act.
    
64. The offender’s School Principal, Pastor, mother and father all had input into the Pre Sentence Report. They all made contributions supporting the juvenile’s release into the community. The juvenile is committed to attending school and living at home.
    
65. The juvenile comes from a caring family where the offender's mother and father take care of him and guide his development. When they found out that he was involved in offending, they sent him straight to the police station to give himself up. This demonstrates to me that the offender was to be released, he would have a supportive and protective environment. I consider that the offender would have a good chance of being rehabilitated and reintegrated into his community particularly with the help of his family, school, his church and with the supervision of the Probation officer. I consider that the juvenile is a good candidate for a non-custodial sentence.
    
66. In my view further incarcerating this 15 year old juvenile is unlikely to make the public safer. What in fact may occur is that after 4 years a young person may become further criminalized and may in fact pose a greater risk to our community and society.
    
67. Recent research from Australia that draws on international studies demonstrates that putting a child in prison significantly increases the risk for that child to reoffend in the future. The earlier the child comes into contact with the prison system the more likely they will reoffend in the future. Incarceration of a juvenile also creates a significant risk of disruption that juvenile's life expectations as it impacts on their education and emotional development.
    
68. Prison is criminogenic. 85% of children released from sentenced imprisonment in Australia return within 12 months. 51% of children whose first sentence was detention/incarceration return to prison before turning 18. Over 30% of adult prisoners have a prior history of juvenile detention; Sotiri, M; Schetzer, L; Kerr, A (2024) Children, Youth Justice and Alternatives to Incarceration in Australia, Justice Reform Initiative, Australia p 10.
    
69. A suspension of part of the sentence would serve the interests of justice and the juvenile. I do not consider the juvenile poses any current and present risk to any person in the community if there is adequate supervision as the court has proposed. The 14 year old juvenile made a very bad decision on the spur of the moment egged on by peer group pressure.
    
70. The juvenile has been incarcerated for nearly 1 year, he has experienced punitive conditions and he has promised to never re-offend.
    

ORDERS

71. The Orders of the Court are as follows:
    
    1. Length of sentence imposed – four (4) years.
    2. Pre-sentence period to be deducted – eleven (11) months, 1 week, 3 days.
    3. Resultant sentence to the served – three (3) years 2 weeks 4 days.
    4. Amount of sentence suspended - three (3) years 2 weeks 4 days on the following conditions:
    • 4.1 Pursuant to s 80(2)(b) of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014 the juvenile is to be immediately released and be on probation for three years. The terms of the probation pursuant to s 83 of the Juvenile Justice Act 2014 are:
    • 4.1.1 Report to probation within 3 days of release.
    • 4.1.2 Counselling and mentoring sessions as directed by probation on violence prevention once every month.
    • 4.1.3 Perform 2 hours community service at his church every Sunday.
    • 4.1.4 Probation to conduct home visit every 6 months.
    • 4.1.5 The juvenile is to reside with his parents during the period of probation.
    • 4.1.6 The juvenile is to attend school during the period of probation.
    • 4.1.7 Probation to schedule six monthly reviews before the court.
    5. The juvenile’s family pay Person 1 and Person 2 K500 as compensation within 28 days.
    6. Following the probation period the juvenile is to be on good behaviour on his own recognizance.

________________________________________________________________
Lawyers for the State: Public Prosecutor
Lawyer for the offender: Public Solicitor