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

Lone v Aldo [2021] SBLC 6; Land Case 17 of 2019 (27 April 2021)

IN THE MALAITA LOCAL COURT

Of SOLOMON ISLANDS

AUKI, MALAITA PROVINCE

LAND CASE NO: 17 of 2019

IN THE MATTER OF DURUANA LAND

BETWEEN BILLY LONE, CHRIS SADE PLAINTIFFS

WILLY GILLIBITY & CHRIS SIOSI

AND TIMOTHY ALDO, TIMOTHY DEME DEFENDANTS

Date of Hearing: 16^th April 2021

Date of Ruling: 27^th April 2021

__________________________________________________________________________________

Preliminary Hearing

Introduction

This is a remittal case from the Customary Land Appeal Court (CLAC) for a newly constituted panel of the Local Court to hear the matter afresh (De Novo).
The matter was referred to the Local Court by Plaintiff and was registered as Case No: 17 of 2019.
The Local Court is the Court of the first instance that deals mainly with customary facts of Ownership of a Customary Land.

Issue

Whether this Court has to deal with the historical background of the said land in dispute.
Whether both parties are from the same tribe that was first discovered of the said land in dispute.
Whether both parties are establishing their customary facts and norms to their claims of Customary Discovery.

Application

Whether this Court has to deal with the historical background of the said land in dispute. Perhaps this was a very important issue that this newly Constituted Panel needs to be carefully analyses it is stated in the ruling of the Customary Land Appeal Court (CLAC), the matter before this court to be heard afresh. According to the Jurisdiction of the Local Court, When the matter is remitted for a fresh hearing from the newly Constituted Panel, they expecting both parties to provide their new fresh claims and facts of ownership regarding how they discovered the said land in dispute in custom, and the modes of prayer they use, and their Taboo sites. These issues are the main component that this newly constituted Panel will focus mainly upon.

Plaintiff Side

Plaintiff claimed that they came from their two ancestors Usuone and Iroiro that came out from Mota Tribe through their main Ancestor Taloimota he said, according to the two generations of the two brothers, the defendant born female to the tribe Duruana which the two brothers have discovered.
The defendant was tscenescendant of Iroiro through the daughter of Sugai by the name of Tawane. Tawane married Au a man from the Fotoe tribe. And because he was part of this tribe in the female linage he is qual to speak on behave of the the tribe of Duruana.

According to the submission of Plaintiff, he claimed that there are two brothers Usuone and Iroiro that came from the Mota Tribe through their main ancestor Taloimota. The two brothers came and discovered the said land in dispute, and established their Principle Taboo Site called Rongoebungu. With that, the elder brother Usuone was the first high priest within the Principle taboo site. Plaintiff claimed that there are three sacrificial fires, namely Erenifoa, Erenimaoma, and Erenifa’abua. He stated that the practice of the principal high priest in Duruana tribal land was rotated between the lineage of Usuone and Iroiro. The two brothers share one common prayer, one common feast, and one common fire for compensation. He also mentioned that his other minor taboo sites located within the said land in dispute, Takwanikwalo, Otaota, Hafali, Aenaofa, Sufia Taboo Sites. The last High priest was Billy Feralao, and then Christianity arrived. Before coming into Christianity he closed all the taboo sites and then he joined Christianity. They buried him within Duruana land but not in any Taboo site because he came into Christianity.

Defendant Side

Defendant believed that he came from the tribe of Torodo that he was the first discoverer of the said land in dispute (Duruana Land). The defendant claimed that Tawane is the sister of Sungai1, Tawane married to Au a man from the Fotoe tribe and begot Leo [1687] EngR 899; 2, Leo 2 begot Sungai 2, Sungai 2 begot Iroiasi, Iroiasi begot Aldo and Aldo begot Timothy, despite that there was no male lineage continued, but only the female lineage survived with that he claimed to be a male descendant of Duruana Tribe. The male lineage Sungai 1 begot Ngunu, begot Faimanga begot Gore begot Rumai, and from Rumai no male exists.

Prior to the submission of the defendant, the defendant claimed that they came from the tribe of Torodo. Torodo was the first discoverer of the said land in dispute, he mentioned that the first taboo site that the discoverer was established is the Otaota Principal Taboo site. He also mentioned to the court that the last high priest is Gore in Duruana Land, and was buried in Otaota Principle Taboo Site. Within the Taboo site in Otaota, the defendant stated that the Erenimoama, Erenifoa been desecrated by the people associated with the Plaintiff, some historical stones, marks that were as indicators are destroyed or removed. Whether in Malaita custom that was the true evidence that the principal Taboo Site just desecrated by People without Castigation. This gives a narrow belief that the Principle Taboo Site will be treated that way. The defendant claiming that Goloau was also buried in Otaota the principal Taboo site. That statement was also confirmed by Plaintiff that Goloau was buried at Otaota Taboo Site. If that was the case, it raised an important question whether in the custom of Malaita a person that was murdered can be buried in any principal taboo site, according to Custom of Malaita a person that was murdered is not allowed to bury in any principal taboo site but can be buried in any minor taboo site.

Court Findings

As it is indicated above that this is an essential component for this court to prudently addressed, this court has to carefully considered those statements provided by the parties. During the survey, the defendant confirmed to the court that they are from female lineage to the land in dispute. When the court asked them to establish their facts of the discoverer in the taboo site that he claims that it is their principal taboo site. This was contradicted with the statement provided in court during the court hearing.
Whether both parties are establishing their customary facts and norms to their claims of customary discovery. According to the jurisdiction of this court, the main essential component that this court must well think of is the customary facts and norms of ownership regarding the discovery of the customary land.

By the customary knowledge of a claim of discovery, you will know the historical background of your ancestors. In Plaintiff's case, Plaintiff claimed that they are out from Mota tribe through their main Ancestor Taloimato to Usuone and Iroiro. And in Defendant’s case during cross-examination by the court. Court asked the defendant who is the father of Torodo, the defendant fail to provide the name of his main Ancestor: and during the survey, the defendant told the court that his ancestor came from the sea. Following the custom of Malaita, the discoverer should come from the bush and his principal taboo site must be located at the top of the land. Whilst the defendant claiming that his ancestor came from the sea this brought disbelief to the claim of the defendant.

During the court hearing, the defendant’s witness stated that the Plaintiff is a settler. According to the custom, if a person is a settler he will not have any customary facts or norms located within any land thahas settled. But during theg the survey we first enter into the principal taboo site that the plaintiff claimed that is his principle taboo site, He touched the stones at the entrance and even everything that he claimed within that principal Taboo Site, for example, Erenifoa, Eremaoma, Erenifa’abua, and the two stone representing his two Ancestor, Usuone and Iroiro, and the other Stone representing their main ancestor Taloimota, and also the grave of his two ancestors, he also explained in custom how they use modes of prayer in that principal taboo site. That was very appropriate to the customary practice of Malaita. The defendant claims his Taboo Site Taukai where Aldo is buried. The Court finds out that Taukai is a normal burial ground used by the community living in the centre village.

Conclusion

After carefully analysing all the issues raised by the parties regarding their statements and their submissions, this court was satisfied with the outcome of its findings. This court believes that the Duruana Land was discovered by the ancestor of Plaintiff and also proved in its own eyes the elements and facts of claims in the custom of Malaita that presented by Plaintiff. Having considered the above issues and pieces of evidence presented to the court, the current Malaita Local Court Panel give its decision as follows:

Court Decision

1. That the Rongobungu is the Principle Taboo Site of Duruana Customary Land.
2. Vest Primary Ownership of Duruana Customary Land on Billy Lone, Chris Sade, Willy Gilibity and Chris Siosi.
3. Anything to do within Duruana customary Land must consulted the Plaintiffs.
4. That the court upheld the Plaintiff’s Map, and Registered lot No 5LR 429 was excluded from this decision.
5. No order of Cost
   

Before Local Court Panel

Vice President _______________________ Philip Waletobata

Justice Member _______________________ Nelson Ne’e

Justice Member ________________________ Ataly Ramo

Court Clerk ____________________________ Wesley Ramo

Rights of Appeal is within 90 days as of Date of the Judgment.