Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Kiribati

Republic v Naata - judgment [2002] KIHC 61; Criminal Case 32 of 2001 (22 May 2002)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
HELD AT BETIO
REPUBLIC OF KIRIBATI

High Court Criminal Case 32 of 2001

THE REPUBLIC

vs

KORIRI NAATA

For the Republic: Ms Pauline Beiatau
For the Accused: Ms Batitea Tekanito

Date of Hearing: 20 May 2002

JUDGMENT

During the night of Saturday 10 June 2000 a dwelling house at Temwaiku belonging to Terawaati Tebwe was burnt down.

About 11 o’clock the accused, Koriri Naata, went into a family maneaba at Temwaiku. People were there watching a video. One of the two witnesses who described Koriri’s actions, Bwarane Tourakai, said Koriri was drunk.

He was looking for Teraawati: said he was going to stone Terawaati’s head or words to that effect. ...... Also said he was going to torch Terawaati’s house. He was just shouting out. Later saw the house burning. .... I saw him again that evening. I heard him say that Terawaati’s house was burnt. Outside maneaba. He said it was he who did it.

In cross examination Bwarane said he did not see Koriri the second time: he only recognized the voice.

[I assumed] it was Koriri who said he’d burnt house from what he’d said before.

The other witness Kiaaua Tauraba, was also at the maneaba. He heard shouting and recognized the accused’s voice: he knew the accused by sight.

I heard him talking and shouting loudly from outside. “What’s wrong with you? Are you all afraid of Terawaati?” .....After watching movie for a while, heard the shout. “Where is Terawaati now? His house has been burnt”. .... “Terawaati I’ve burnt your house down”.

In cross examination Kiaaua said that he had no doubt it was the accused shouting: he recognized his voice.

The third witness for the prosecution was the Investigating Officer Tabanea Kauriaa. He went to the house which had burnt. He identified it as Terawaati’s.

Terawaati was not called although his name had been on the list of witnesses: nor was the only other person, Kaaka Kooa, on the list. Ms Beiatau told me that Kaaka had been summoned but when the police called to bring him to the court on Monday morning he was not at home: he had already left. I allowed an adjournment for an hour and would have allowed longer in the hope that Kaaka be found and brought to court but he may have gone to North Tarawa. There was no point in waiting longer.

[Later I was told the summons may have been served on Kaaka’s sister; Kaaka may not have received it. If he had not been properly served, then the prosecution had not been entitled to an adjournment.]

The prosecution closed its case.

Ms Tekanito submitted that her client had no case to answer, that the prosecution evidence was unreliable. I rejected the submission. Whether evidence is reliable is a matter for the jury, not for the judge. At the end of the prosecution case the only question to be answered on a submission of no case to answer is whether there is any evidence on which a jury properly directed could convict. In my view there was such evidence, that of the accused’s admissions, according to the two prosecution witnesses.

Ms Tekanito then said that the defence would not call any evidence.

Both Bwarane and Kiaaua were credible and reliable witnesses. I accept their evidence beyond reasonable doubt. Each heard the accused inveighing against Terawaati and later each heard the accused assert that he had burnt Terawaati’s house down. The house had been burnt down. Bwarane saw it burning and Kiaaua said, “there did seem to be some brightness”. The Investigating Officer saw the house later, burnt down.

There is no reasonable doubt that the accused burnt down Terawaati’s house. He is guilty of arson as charged.

Dated the 22nd day of May 2002

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
CHIEF JUSTICE