HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua, J.)
Criminal Jurisdiction

Criminal Case No. 222 OF 2010

REGINA

–V-

BEN JERI

Date of Hearing: 2nd December 2010
Date of Ruling: 7th December 2010

Mr. Kelesi for the Crown
Mr. Barlow for the Accused

RULING ON APPLICATION FOR BAIL

Mwanesalua, J: The accused is charged with Murder Contrary to section 200 of the Penal Code. He was committed for trial to the High Court on 8 July 2010 but sent to Rove Prison for safe custody pending trial.

He applied for bail in November this year but that was refused on the basis he did not have any suitable person with financial resources to be surety for him.

In that circumstances he filed this second application after securing a suitable person who works and would be able to put up a precise amount in a recognizance to act as surety for him

His surety will be Andrew Nene the husband of the accused's sister Maria Andrew who has a residential house at Koviloko in Honiara, and works for SS Security Service in Honiara. Andrew Nene has under taken to deposit the sum of $1000.00 to act as surety for the applicant. His function would be to ensure that the applicant complies with the bail conditions.

Andrew Nene will loose his money if the applicant fails to abide by his bail conditions. That is to say, that the court will forfeit his $1000.00 to the Government. Standing as surety involves a very serious obligation and it is only fair and proper that a prospective surety be made aware officially of the burden.

In R v Porter [1910] 1 KB 369, 373, Lord Alverstone CJ said:
"It is to the interest of the public that criminals should be brought to justice and, therefore, that it should be made as difficult as possible for a criminal to abscond; for many years it has been held that not only are [persons who go] bail responsible on their recognizance for the due appearance of the person charged, but that if it comes to their knowledge that he is about to abscond, they should at once inform the police of the fact. [The words in brackets were omitted from the report as the result of a misprint. They were included in a version of the same passage in [1909-10] A11 ER 78, 80.]"

This court is however of the view that Andrew Nene is a suitable surety and will ensure that the applicant complies with his bail conditions.

The court will therefore allow this application and that he is released on bail with conditions and surety.

Order accordingly. 

THE COURT