Proseccutor Absent, Suai Case Postponed

JSMP, June 2009 -In accordance with a schedule of hearings prepared for the Suai District Court, a case of attempted murder (14/C.ord/TDS/2008) was scheduled to be heard on 10 June 2009. However, the hearing was postponed because the prosecutor handling the case was a relative of the defendant (the defendant is the nephew of the prosecutor) which under article 51(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code renders the Prosecutor ineligible to act. Under section 39 (a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, judges are disqualified from hearing any case in which they are related to a party appearing before the court. Article 51 (a) of the Criminal Procedure Code states that “the provisions concerning disqualifications and suspicions in respect of judges are applicable to public prosecutors, with the necessary adaptations”.

A prosecutor based in Dili was appointed to replace the initial prosecutor, but was unable to travel to the Suai District Court due to ill health. JSMP observed that the defendant, victim and witnesses nonetheless arrived at the court to attend the hearing, but were informed by the administrative officer on duty that the trial had been postponed. JSMP spoke to a court clerk on duty and asked when the case would be heard, but the court clerk said that no schedule had yet been set, and that it would depend on the availability of judges, who are predominantly based in Dili.

JSMP notes that a limited number of court actors (prosecutors, judges and public defenders) are assigned to district courts other than Dili, and that trials are often postponed or adjourned when a court actor unexpectedly withdraws from a case before the courts. JSMP strongly recommends that a greater number of court actors must be made available to work in the district courts, so that they can readily respond to unforeseen problems that emerge.

JSMP is also concerned about a complaint made by a court clerk regarding the limited number of administrative staff available to deliver court summons to the districts of Bobonaro, Same, Ainaro and Suai, all of which fall within the jurisdiction of the Suai District Court. JSMP recommends that the Ministry of Justice immediately recruit more staff to streamline the process of case management at the Suai District Court.

For more information please contact:

Luis Olivera Sampaio

Executive Director of JSMP

Email: Luis@jsmp.minihub.org

Landline: 3323883

JSMP - Uato-Lari Case Decided

JSMP, June 2009 - The Uato-Lari case is one of a group of cases that shook Timor-Leste after the parliamentary elections 2007. The case concerns the involvement of five defendants in rioting and property damage in the district of Viqueque.

Each of the five defendants in the Uato-Lari case were charged with:

(a) committing violence against persons and property (section 170 of the Indonesian Penal Code); and

(b) conspiracy to commit violence against persons and property (section 187 of the Indonesian Penal Code)

Like in other cases, the victims and the community at large have keenly awaited the court’s decision, which was handed down in the Baucau District Court on Monday 8 June. As close friends and family of the defendants were present in court, and PNTL and UNPOL officers were on standby to deal with possible disturbances or undesirable incidents Several observers from international and national NGOs were also present. The observers arrived several hours early in anticipation of the decision being handed down. As this is regarded a serious case, a wide range of people were focused on the trial.

The four page decision was read out by presiding judge Edite Palmira in Tetum to the five defendants who were sitting in a row facing the panel of judges. The decision referred to the facts revealed during the trial, and to the testimony provided by the parties and witnesses.

The court found that within the five defendants some had been involved in rioting in Viqueque that resulted in the burning of hundreds of houses and other significant damage to property. Many people were forced to flee, because they had lost their homes.

The court also found that on 8 August 2007 the defendants were present at the scene of the crime, and incited others to burn houses and damaged the property of others.

However, the court found that it had not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that all five defendants damaged property and committed arson as outlined in the charges.

The court dismissed all charges relating to article 170 of the Indonesian Penal Code. The court did, however, find three of the defendants guilty of conspiracy to commit violence to persons and property under section 181 of the Indonesian Penal Code. The court sentenced the defendants LP, MG, and D to three years imprisonment. The other two defendants, HC and GD, were acquitted of all charges.

JSMP has monitored this case for some time, and notes that the court’s decision is more lenient that the recommendation of sentence made orally by the public prosecutor during the last hearing of this case on 6 May 2009. The prosecutor asked the court to sentence the defendants GD and D in accordance with the severity of their crime, and recommended a sentence of no less than five years and six months imprisonment. The prosecutor also recommended that the remaining defendants be given more lenient sentences not in excess of 5 years imprisonment.

In addition to the three year sentence, the court also ordered the three convicted defendants to pay court costs of $5. After hearing the decision the defendants left the court room, spoke with their lawyer Dr. Arlindo Sanches, and were advised to return to their respective homes.

JSMP has not yet confirmed if the convicted persons intend to lodge an appeal, or if they will accept the three year sentence. However, JSMP notes that in light of the leniency of sentence handed down, the public prosecutor may be likely to lodge an appeal against the court’s decision.

For more information please contact:

Luis de Oliveira Sampaio

Executive Director of JSMP

Email: luis@jsmp.minihub.org

Landline: 3323883