The State v Peter Oh Piom Mo [1998] PNGLR 66

• Jurisdiction: Papua New Guinea
• Judge: Jalina J
• Judgment Date: 10 March 1998
• Citation: [1998] PNGLR 66
• Court: National Court
• Year: 1998
• Judgement Number: N1703

National Court: Jalina J

Judgment Delivered: 10 March 1998

N1703

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[ IN THE NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

CR 1475/96

THE STATE

-v-

PETER OH PIOM MO

JALINA, J.

Kavieng: 8-11 July 1997

Rabaul: 16-20 February 1998

Kavieng: 10 March 1998

Criminal Law - Bribery - offer of Cash - at night - to Fisheries Officer - Offer made in line with accepted practice within organisation accused associated with - whether accused intended to bribe in the circumstances - existence of accepted practice no defence - Accepted practice not strictly followed - Accused found guilty - Criminal Code ss. 97B(1)(d).

Evidence - Bribery - past practice in giving financial assistance to Public Servants - evidence of such practice inadmissable - Criminal Code s.97D(1)

Mr. N.T Sios for the State

Mr. J. S. Reeve for the Accused

10 March 1998

JUDGMENT ON VERDICT

JALINA, J.: This accused, who is a South Korean national, is charged that he on 20th May 1996 at Kavieng Town in Papua New Guinea offered to one Lamiller Pawut, a person employed in the Public Service Two Thousand Kina (K2,000.00) in cash as an inducement to hinder Lamiller Pawut in the performance of an official act. He has pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The State has alleged that on 20th May 1996 the accused and one Bill Vevo rang one Lamiller Pawut, the Senior Fisheries Surveillance Officer with the National Fisheries Authority based in Kavieng and spoke to him about a vessel “Sea Chase” which was then impounded by Mr Pawut in Manus for alleged breaches of the Fisheries Act. They also told him that they would be travelling to Kavieng that same afternoon and that they wanted to meet him to discuss matters relating to the Sea Chase.

On arrival at Kavieng the accused and Bill Vevo rang Mr Pawut and asked him to meet them at Kavieng Hotel but he refused saying that they should meet him during official hours. But they insisted on seeing him because he was the Fisheries Officer who had travelled to Manus on 16th May 1996 and impounded the Sea Chase. During the conversation Mr Pawut told them that he would bring a Fisheries Officer with him but the accused and Bill Vevo insisted on seeing him alone. Mr Pawut agreed to meet them at Malangan Lodge but also took two fisheries officers and a relative for a drink. While Mr Pawut and his friends were at Malangan Lodge the accused and Bill Vevo arrived.

When the accused and Bill Vevo arrived they started discussing with Mr Pawut the release of the boat and at the same time offered K2,000.00 cash to Mr Pawut. They had purposely came to give that money to Mr Pawut but he refused. They insisted that it was not a bribe but they wanted the Sea Chase released. They further told him not to inform Fisheries Headquarters about it.

After Mr Pawut refused to accept the money, the accused and Bill Vevo asked him to drop them off at Kavieng Hotel which he agreed to do. When they got into the vehicle, the accused sat on the left front seat and Mr Pawut on the driver’s seat. Mr Bill Vevo and Mr Pawut’s friends including the two Fisheries Officers sat at the back of the vehicle.

On the way to Kavieng Hotel the accused took out the envelope containing the cash and put it in the centre box of the vehicle for Mr Pawut to take the money. Mr Pawut dropped off the accused and Mr Vevo at the Kavieng Hotel and drove to Fisheries College where he was living at the time. The next morning the matter was reported to the principal of the Fisheries College and then to the police.

The accused has been charged pursuant to s. 97B in particular sub-section (1)(b):

“Bribery of member of public service

(1) A person who offers to a person employed in the Public Service, or being a person employed in the Public Service, solicits or accepts a gratification as an inducement or reward for:

(a) the person employed in the Public Service voting or abstaining from voting at any meeting in favour of or against any measure; or

(b) the person employed in the Public Service performing or abstaining from performing or aiding in procuring or hindering the performance of an official act; or

(c) the person employed in the Public Service aiding in procuring or preventing the passing of any vote or granting of any contract in favour of any person; or

(d) the person employed in the Public Service showing or refraining from showing any favour of disfavour in his capacity as a person employed in the Public Service, is guilty of an offence.

Penalty: A fine at the discretion of the Court or imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years, or both.

2. An offence under Subsection (1) is committed notwithstanding that the person employed in the Public Service had not right or opportunity to show or refrain from showing favour or that the inducement was not in relation to the affairs of the public body.”

Evidence shows that after impounding the Sea Chase on 16 May 1996 and ordering it to sail to Kavieng for further investigation, Mr Pawut remained in Manus until Sunday 19 May when he returned to Kavieng. His reason for not staying on in Manus beyond 19th May was that his travel was only funded up to that date (19th May).

Evidence also shows (Def Exhibit 4) that the Ship’s Agent, Goldstar Shipping was notified in Kokopo about the impounding of the Ship and other matters seized from it. Mr Robinson Taula, the General Manager of Goldstar Shipping tried to contact Mr Pawut at Kavieng by phone but to no...