Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

R v Naibae [2024] SBHC 162; HCSI-CRC 30 of 2023 (16 July 2024)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 30 Of 2023

REX

V

EDDIE MITI NAIBAE

Date of Hearing: 27 June 2024 (Guilty Plea and Sentencing Submission)
Date of Sentence: 16 July 2024

Counsel; Mr Taupongi for the Crown.
Counsel; Mr. Harunari for the Defendant

SENTENCING AND PAROLE ENTITLEMENT PERIOD

1. On the early morning of Monday 26th December 2022, Eddie Miti Naibae (“Mr Naibae”) was drinking beer alone at one of his brother’s house at Kobito 3, East Honiara. Mr Naibae wanted to light his cigarette. He went to a closed market-table nearby and asked for a match.
2. A group of boys nearby heard Mr Naibae. One of the boys shouted and told him to stop making noise. The boys told Mr Naibae to go away and threatened to assault him if he did not leave. Steven Fifi (deceased) along with 2 of his relatives were amongst the group of boys.
3. Mr. Naibae walked away. One of the boys swore at him – “You mother fucker”. Mr Naibae got angry. Mr Naibae returned to the boys holding a knife in his right hand. He struck Steven Fifi on the left side of his neck. Steven Fifi died the same day from the knife wound and severe blood loss.
4. Mr. Naibae was first arraigned on 8/5/2023. He pleaded not guilty. I listed trial from 24 - 28 June 2024. On 27/6/2024, Naibae changed plea and entered a guilty plea. I convicted Naibae upon his guilty plea. I sentenced Naibae to mandatory life time imprisonment. This is the only punishment available for murder.
5. Whilst I sentenced Naibae to life imprisonment, it is incumbent on me to also set a minimum time period of life imprisonment that Naibae must serve, before he is entitled to parole. Parole however is a decision entrusted to a different body.
6. The sole issue for determination is – “What is the minimum period of life imprisonment Mr Naibae must serve before he is entitled to parole”?
7. The leading authority on minimum parole entitlement period is the Court of Appeal case of Ludawane which set guidelines for different bands of murder convictions. The highest band, for exceptionally serious cases (for example, as in Ludawane, a young, helpless victim to whom the offender owed a moral duty as father; sustained brutal beatings and assaults carried out over 4 days and the sheer brutality of the crime) attracted a start point of 20 years non-parole period (reduced to 18 years for mitigating features in that case). Generally serious murder cases (for example, contract killing, politically motivated killing, multiple injuries or vulnerable child victim) should start around 15 years or higher. Less serious cases (for example, where people known to each other lost their tempers or quarrelled) could start at 12 years non-parole period. Normal start point sentence could reduce if the case came close to the borderline between murder and manslaughter or if the offender was provoked.
8. Although the present case has some aggravating features, it was not a pre-meditated killing. Mr Naibae, who was drunk, acted recklessly and impetuously in getting a knife and using the knife when he hit out at his victim, one of whose companions had annoyed Mr Naibae by swearing at him. It was a single blow. The victim was a relative of Mr Naibae. In Kwaio custom, Mr Naibae would ordinarily have had an obligation to protect his relative. His victim died from his wound and blood loss the same day he was wounded. I find this case is in the moderate range of murder bordering between murder and manslaughter. Additionally Naibae was also provoked. I therefore reduced the normal start point sentence from 12 to 10 years non-parole period.
9. The fact that Mr Naibae was drunk may be an aggravating feature or not. But it is no excuse that he was drunk. He cannot evade liability because he put himself in a state where he was unable to think as clearly as he could have done, if sober.
10. I identify the following aggravating features:-
    • (i) Naibae obtained a weapon which aggravated the assault in two ways. First, he cannot claim his blow was immediately impulsive, he took time to get his knife. Second, the knife a deadly weapon strongly increased the danger of his action, delivering a blow to his victim’s neck.
    • (ii) The assault occurred in the hours of darkness, in the early morning, making it difficult for the victim to anticipate his danger or defend himself.
    • (iii) The assault was disproportionate in two ways. First, a stab to the neck was completely disproportionate to the rude words spoken to Mr Naibae. Second, his victim was unarmed. It was not an equal engagement.
11. In general, aggravating features in a murder case should generally be counted in substantial steps – in years rather than weeks or months. In this case, I add 5 years to the non-parole period because of the aggravating features. Accordingly, I raise the non-parole period from 10 years to 15 years.
12. Mr Naibae did not plead guilty at the first opportunity but his plea, albeit later, saved trial time and expenses. I shall give a 15 percent reduction for his late guilty plea instead of the normal 30 percent allowable for genuine early guilty pleas. This comes out to 2 years.
13. Mr Naibae is a first time offender. He has engaged in reconciliation and paid compensation (worthy custom). He has demonstrated remorse. I shall reduce his non-parole period by another 2 years for these features.
14. Because of the mitigating features, I reduced the non-parole period by 4 years. This result in an effective non-parole period of 11 years.

Orders

15. Mr Naibae, you are convicted of murder of Mr Fifi and sentenced to life imprisonment.

I impose a period of 11 years before you may be entitled to apply for parole. This term begins as from 27th December 2022.

THE COURT
JUSTICE JOHN A KENIAPISIA
PUISNE JUDGE