NATIONAL COURT TRIAL

PROCESS
SENTENCING
 LEARNING OUTCOMES
BY THE END OF THE SESSION, THE STUDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO:
• BE FAMILIAR WITH THE STATUTORY BASIS FOR PENALTY
• DEMONSTRATE FAMILIARITY WITH THE PURPOSE FOR SENTENCING
TYPES OF PENALTIES THE COURT CAN IMPOSE ON THE
PRISONER
• DEMONSTRATE FAMILIARITY WITH RELEVANT ROLES OF THE
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES IN SENTENCING AND REHABILITATION
OF PRISONERS
• DEMONSTRATE FAMILIARITY WITH VARIOUS PROGRAMS RUN BY
THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
 STATUTORY BASIS FOR PENALTY

• ONCE CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY IS ESTABLISHED BY THE COURT THEN APPROPRIATE PENALTY WOULD BE
IMPOSED BY THE COURT. PENALTY CAN BE IN THE FORM OF CUSTODIAL SENTENCE OR NON CUSTODIAL
SENTENCE AND OR FINE OR RESTITUTION AND COMPENSATION UNDER THE CRIMINAL LAW (COMPENSATION)
ACT AND SECTION 616 AND 624 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT.

• BOTH LOWER COURTS AND HIGHER COURTS CAN IMPOSE PUNISHMENT PURSUANT TO THE RELEVANT
LEGISLATIONS LIKE THE VILLAGE COURTS ACT, SUMMARY OFFENCES ACT AND THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT
AND OTHER LEGISLATIONS THAT HAVE CRIMINAL PROVISIONS, EXAMPLE THE ADULTERY AND ENTICEMENT
ACT, INTER GROUP FIGHTING ACT AND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ACT, CUSTOMS ACT

• COURTS WILL NOT IMPOSE PENALTIES IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR A PARTICULAR
OFFENCE WHICH ARE PRESCRIBED BY STATUTE1, AND THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT SETS OUT THE TYPES OF
PUNISHMENTS TO BE IMPOSED BY ON A PERSON ONCE FOUND GUILTY OF AN OFFENCE.2

• COURTS TO IMPOSE A LESSER SENTENCE BY INVOKING S19 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT 3
 PENALTIES AND SENTENCE
▪ WHO DETERMINES THE SENTENCE?
▪ THE SENTENCE IS DETERMINED BY THE RELEVANT COURT. MOST OFFENSES HAVE A MAXIMUM
PENALTY ATTACHED BY WHICH THE COURT IS GUIDED. EXAMPLE THE SUMMARY OFFENCES
ACT AND THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT STATES THE MAXIMUM PENALTY FOR THE SPECIFIC
OFFENCES. THE COURT IS ALSO ASSISTED BY OTHER STATUTORY PROVISIONS DETAILING THE
RANGE OF PENALTIES AND COMBINATIONS POSSIBLE.
▪ IN ADDITION, THE JUDGES HAVE FORMULATED THEIR OWN SENTENCING GUIDELINES IN THE
CASE OF THE MOST SERIOUS INDICTABLE OFFENSES.
▪ *WHICH PERSONS HAVE INPUT INTO THE SENTENCING PROCESS?
▪ PSYCHIATRIC EXPERTISE MIGHT BE CONSULTED IN ANY CASE WHERE THE STATE OF MIND OF
THE OFFENDER WAS IN QUESTION. EVIDENCE THAT THE OFFENDER HAD ALREADY PROVIDED
CUSTOMARY COMPENSATION TO THE VICTIM COULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AS A
MITIGATING FACTOR. THE VIEWS OF THE VICTIM WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE CASE OF A
VILLAGE COURT HEARING. PRE-SENTENCING REPORTS FROM JUVENILE COURT OFFICERS IN THE
CASE OF THE JUVENILE COURT, AND PROBATION OFFICERS IN OTHER CASES, MIGHT BE SOUGHT
AND TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY A COURT IN SENTENCE DETERMINATION. 2
__________________________________________________________________________________
•
DINNEN, S. (1993) NATIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, WORLD FACTBOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
•
MATUI, M. (2017) TRIAL PRACTICE AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE P178
•
 SENTENCING CONT
Range of penalties. The range of penalties available to the courts are:
▪ (a) Death,
▪ (b) Imprisonment (with or without hard labor),
▪ (c) Detention in a Juvenile Institution,
▪ (d) Suspended sentences,
▪ (e) Fines,
▪ (f) Probation,
▪ (g) Community work orders,
▪ (h) Good Behavior Bonds, and
▪ (i) Compensation orders. Serious property offenses and offenses against the person are almost
invariably punished with imprisonment, while suspended sentences, probation and fines are used
for less serious offenses.
▪ Under the Probation Act, a court can impose particular conditions upon probationers. Some
judges have used this to pass sentences of "home imprisonment" upon offenders. (State v. Justin
Vincent Nyama, 1988).
 PENALTIES AND SENTENCE

❑ Death penalty.
❑ The death penalty has been available for many years for the offenses of treason, piracy with
violence and attempted piracy with personal violence. It has, however, never been imposed for
any of these offenses.
❑ A recent amendment to the Criminal Code introduces the death penalty for a person convicted
of wilful murder. This provision has not yet been used. (Criminal Code, Sect.37,81,82; Criminal
Code (Amendment) Act, 1991, Sect. 299).
❑ Section 614 of the Criminal Code provides that the death penalty "shall be carried out by
hanging the offender by his neck until he is dead".
 PURPOSE OF SENTENCING
1. RESTRAINT- WHEN A PERSON COMMITS AN OFFENCE HE MUST BE PUT AWAY IN ISOLATION
FROM THE OTHER PEOPLE SO AS NOT TO HARM THEM OR TO INFLUENCE THEM TO COMMIT AN
OFFENCE OR TO HARM HIMSELF
2. REHABILITATION THE PNG CORRECTIONAL SERVICES HAVE VARIOUS PROGRAMS FOR
REHABILITATING PRISONERS USING VARIOUS PROGRAMS WITHIN THE CORRECTIONAL
SERVICES AND THEIR PARTNERS
3. REFORMATION- THE PNG CORRECTIONAL SERVICES HAVE VARIOUS PROGRAMS FOR
REFORMING PRISONERS IN AND AROUND THE JAILS. THE AIM OF THE PROGRAMS ARE TO
IMPART SKILLS TRAINING TO THE PRISONERS SO THAT WHEN THEY RETURN HOME, THEY
WOULD BE ABLE TO RELY ON THE SKILLS TO EARN A HONEST LIVING. EXAMPLES OF SKILLS
ARE FARMING, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, CARPENTRY, WEAVING AND CREATING ARTS AND
CRAFTS, STUDYING AT THE OPEN LEARNING, BIBLE CLASSES AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTIONS
AND BIBLE STUDIES.

4. RETRIBUTION-IS BASICALLY SERVING THE SENTENCE PROPORTIONATE TO THE CRIME. WHEN

A PERSON COMMITS A CRIME, HE MUST SERVE A JAIL TERM THAT BEFITS THE OFFENCE. THE
IDIOM “DO THE CRIME, DO THE TIME, PERFECTLY DESCRIBES SUMS IT UP.
5. DETERRENCE-PUNISHMENTS ARE COMMONLY USED TO DETER A PERSON FROM REPEATING
AN OFFENCE SO DETERRENCE IS ONE OF THE MAIN FACTORS JUDGES TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION WHEN IMPOSING SENTENCES ON OFFENDERS.1
____________________________________________________________________________________
1. MATUI, M. (2017) TRIAL PRACTICE AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE P. 182
 CONSIDERATION FOR SENTENCING
ON SENTENCE THE PROSECUTION SHOULD ASSIST THE COURT BY IDENTIFYING:
• A) WHETHER THERE ARE OTHER MATTERS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ON
SENTENCE UNDER S 603 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE;
• B) THE MAXIMUM PENALTY PRESCRIBED FOR THE RELEVANT OFFENCE;
• C) RELEVANT SENTENCING PRINCIPLES;
• D) THE APPROPRIATE RANGE OF SENTENCE;
• E) THE OFFENDER’S ANTECEDENTS;
• F) THE AGE OF THE OFFENDER;
• G) ANY VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENTS;
• H) THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENCE, IE ITS NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES:
 SENTENCING CONSIDERATIONS

• • ANY AGGRAVATING OR MITIGATING FACTS

• • THE DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION OF THE OFFENDER
• • THE NEED FOR GENERAL AND/OR PERSONAL DETERRENCE
• • THE IMPACT OF THE OFFENCE ON THE VICTIM, THE PUBLIC OR PUBLIC CONFIDENCE;
• I) ANY ASSISTANCE GIVEN TO THE POLICE BY THE OFFENDER;
• J) WHETHER RESTITUTION HAS OCCURRED OR WHETHER THE CRIMINAL COMPENSATION
ACT WOULD APPLY;
• K) WHETHER AN ORDER FOR RESTRICTION OF MOVEMENT IS APPROPRIATE.
• THE PROSECUTION SHOULD OPPOSE ANY ASSERTION MADE BY THE DEFENDANT IN
RELATION TO THE FACTS OF THE OFFENCE UPON WHICH THE DEFENDANT HAS BEEN
FOUND, OR IS PLEADING, GUILTY, OR TO ANY MATTER IN MITIGATION, THAT IS
INACCURATE, MISLEADING OR UNSUBSTANTIATED. IF NECESSARY THE PROSECUTION
SHOULD ASK THE COURT TO HEAR EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE THE FACTS UPON WHICH
SENTENCE SHOULD TAKE PLACE. 1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
•
1. OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- PROSECUTION POLICY 2006.
 TYPES OF PENALTIES
• BOTH THE HIGHER AND LOWER COURTS HAVE DIFFERENT SENTENCING OPTIONS
WHICH VERY MUCH DEPENDS ON THE NATURE OF THE OFFENCES AND THE PENALTIES
STIPULATED IN THE CRIMINAL LAW LEGISLATIONS. SECTION 18 OF THE CRIMINAL
CODE ACT SETS OUT THE
• KINDS OF PUNISHMENT.
• THE PUNISHMENTS THAT MAY BE INFLICTED UNDER THIS CODE ARE–
(a) DEATH; OR
(b) (B) IMPRISONMENT WITH HARD LABOUR; OR
(c) (C) IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT HARD LABOUR; OR
(d) (D) DETENTION IN AN INSTITUTION AS DEFINED IN– (I) THE CHILD WELFARE ACT 1961;
OR (II) THE JUVENILE COURTS ACT 1991;
(e) (E) FINE; OR
(f) (F) FINDING SECURITY TO KEEP THE PEACE AND BE OF GOOD BEHAVIOUR; OR
(g) (G) RESTRICTION OF MOVEMENT.
 FINE
• SECTION 18 AND 19 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT PROVIDES THAT A FINE IS A PUNISHMENT THAT
MAY BE INFLICTED UNDER THE CRIMINAL CODE. SECTION 19 PROVIDES THAT A PERSON LIABLE TO
IMPRISONMENT MAY BE SENTENCED TO PAY A FINE NOT EXCEEDING K2,000 IN ADDITION TO, OR
INSTEAD OF IMPRISONMENT.
• IF A PERSON ORDERED TO PAY A FINE IN PLACE OF IMPRISONMENT FAIL TO PAY THE FINE, HE
WOULD BE IMPRISONED UNTIL HE PAYS THE FINE, AND HE OR SHE SHOULD BE IMPRISONED UNTIL
THE FINE IS PAID, IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER PUNISHMENT TO WHICH HE OR SHE IS SENTENCED.1
• SECTION 200 OF THE DISTRICT COURT ACT PROVIDES FOR THE MAXIMUM FINE OF K200. A COURT
MAY ORDER A FIE AS WELL AS A PERIOD OF IMPRISONMENT PROVIDED THAT THE COMBINATION
OF THE TWO SENTENCES REFLECTS THE OVERALL CRIMINALITY OF THE OFFENCE 2

• _____________________________________________________________________________________________

• 1. MATUI, M. (2017) TRIAL PRACTICE AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE P. 191

• 2. IBID
 GOOD BEHAVIOUR BOND
• SECTION 19 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT PROVIDES FOR THE GOOD BEHAVIOUR
BOND TO BE IMPOSED ON THE OFFENDER BY THE COURT AS A FORM OF
PUNISHMENT TO DETER THE OFFENDER FROM COMMITTING A REPEAT OFFENCE.
• THE COURTS MAY IMPOSE A SENTENCE, WHOLLY SUSPEND THE SENTENCE AND
PLACE THE PRISONER ON GOOD BEHAVIOUR BOND ON SUMMARY OFFENCES
AND IN SOME INSTANCES, INDICTABLE OFFENCE DEPENDING ON THE NATURE OF
THE OFFENCE AND FACTORS FAVOURING THE PRISONER.
 PRISON
• PRISON
• THERE ARE CURRENTLY 18 JAILS IN OPERATION IN PAPUA NEW GUINEA.
• OF THESE, 4 ARE METROPOLITAN JAILS (BOMANA, BUIMO, KEREVAT AND BAISU),
• 12 ARE PROVINCIAL JAILS, AND
• 2 ARE DISTRICT JAILS.
• THE BOMANA METROPOLITAN JAIL, OUTSIDE PORT MORESBY, COMPRISES TWO SEPARATE
INSTITUTIONS. ONE IS THE MAJOR CENTRAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION AND THE OTHER IS THE
MAXIMUM SECURITY INSTITUTION. THE LATTER IS THE ONLY INSTITUTION OF ITS KIND IN THE
COUNTRY.
• AFTER THE COURT HAS SENTENCED THE PRISONER TO SERVE HIS JAIL TERM, HE WILL BE ISSUED A
WARRANT OF COMMITMENT WHERE HE WILL BE CONVEYED TO A STATE PRISON TO SERVE HIS
TERM.
• THE JAILS ARE MANAGED BY THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICES OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA.1

• ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• 1. DINNEN, S. (1993) NATIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, WORLD FACTBOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE

 DEATH PENALTY
• 35. RIGHT TO LIFE.
• (1) NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF HIS LIFE INTENTIONALLY EXCEPT–
(a) IN EXECUTION OF A SENTENCE OF A COURT FOLLOWING HIS CONVICTION OF AN OFFENCE
FOR WHICH THE PENALTY OF DEATH IS PRESCRIBED BY LAW; OR
(b) (B) AS THE RESULT OF THE USE OF FORCE TO SUCH AN EXTENT AS IS REASONABLE IN THE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IS PERMITTED BY ANY OTHER LAW–
(c) (I) FOR THE DEFENCE OF ANY PERSON FROM VIOLENCE; OR
(d) (II) IN ORDER TO EFFECT A LAWFUL ARREST OR TO PREVENT THE ESCAPE OF A PERSON
LAWFULLY DETAINED; OR
(e) (III) FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPRESSING A RIOT, AN INSURRECTION OR A MUTINY; OR
(f) (IV) IN ORDER TO PREVENT HIM FROM COMMITTING AN OFFENCE; OR
(g) (V) FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUPPRESSING PIRACY OR TERRORISM OR SIMILAR ACTS; OR
(h) (C) AS THE RESULT OF A LAWFUL ACT OF WAR.
(i) (2) NOTHING IN SUBSECTION (1)(B) RELIEVES ANY PERSON FROM ANY LIABILITY AT LAW IN
RESPECT OF THE KILLING OF ANOTHER.
 DEATH PENALTY
• DEATH PENALTY
• THE DEATH PENALTY WAS RE-INTRODUCED INTO THE CRIMINAL CODE BY SECTION 2 OF THE CRIMINAL
CODE (AMENDMENT) ACT 1991.
• IT IS A MATTER FOR THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR WHETHER OR NOT TO SEEK THE DEATH PENALTY. IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE SUPREME COURT’S COMMENTS IN MANU KOVI V THE STATE (2005) SC 789, THE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR WILL SEEK THE DEATH PENALTY ONLY IN CASES HE OR SHE CONSIDERS ARE OF
THE WORST KIND.
• IN THIS REGARD THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR WILL HAVE REGARD TO STEVEN LOKE UME & ORS V THE
STATE, SCRA 10 OF 1997, SC 836, 19 MAY 2006 IN WHICH THE SUPREME COURT SUGGESTED THAT THE
DEATH PENALTY MAY BE CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE IN THE FOLLOWING TYPES OF CASES:
• A) THE KILLING OF A CHILD, A YOUNG OR OLD PERSON, OR A PERSON UNDER SOME DISABILITY
NEEDING PROTECTION;
• B) THE KILLING OF A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR RESPONSIBILITY IN THE COMMUNITY PROVIDING
INVALUABLE COMMUNITY SERVICE, WHETHER FOR FREE OR FEE WHO ARE KILLED IN THE COURSE OF
CARRYING OUT THEIR DUTIES OR FOR REASONS TO DO WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES, EG
POLICEMAN, CORRECTIONAL OFFICER, GOVERNMENT OFFICER, SCHOOL TEACHER, CHURCH WORKER,
COMPANY DIRECTOR OR MANAGER; 1
• __________________________________________________________________________________________________
• 1. OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- PROSECUTION POLICY 2006.
 DEATH PENALTY CONT
• C) KILLING OF A LEADER IN GOVERNMENT OR THE COMMUNITY, FOR POLITICAL REASONS;
• D) KILLING OF A PERSON IN THE COURSE OF COMMITTING OTHER CRIMES PERPETRATED ON THE
VICTIM OR OTHER PERSONS SUCH AS RAPE, ROBBERY, THEFT, ETC;
• E) KILLING FOR HIRE;
• F) KILLING OF TWO OR MORE PERSONS IN THE SINGLE ACT OR SERIES OF ACTS;
• G) OFFENCE IS COMMITTED BY A PRISONER IN DETENTION OR CUSTODY SERVING SENTENCE FOR
ANOTHER SERIOUS OFFENCE OF VIOLENCE;
• H) THE PRISONER HAS PRIOR CONVICTION(S) FOR MURDER OFFENCES. 1

• ______________________________________________________________________________________________
• 1. OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- PROSECUTION POLICY 2006.
 ADMINISTRATION
Administration.
Similar to other criminal justice agencies, the Corrective Institutions Service is a national
institution, with its headquarters in Port Moresby.
The Commissioner, Deputy Commissioners and Assistant Commissioners constitute the senior
executive management of the service responsible for operations. They also advise the Minister for
Correctional Services on administrative matters.
In addition to the C.I.S., some churches and N.G.O.'s play a minor role in the provision of penal
services. This includes Boys town in Wewak, Erap in Lae run by the Catholic church, and several
juvenile hostels provided by the Salvation Army.
 TAKE HOME POINTS
• THE PENALTIES IMPOSED ON PERSONS CONVICTED AND SENTENCED TO
IMPRISONMENT HAVE STATUTORY BASIS FOUNDED IN THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT
• IN SENTENCING THE STATE PROSECUTOR HAS A DUTY TO GUIDE ASSIST THE
COURT IN ARRIVING AT A PENALTY PROPORTIONATE TO THE OFFENCE. THE
COURTS ARE GUIDED BY THE SENTENCING PRINCIPLES TO IMPOSE SENTENCES
AND THAT ALSO INCLUDES IN DEATH PENALTY CASES
• THE COURTS IMPOSE BOTH CUSTODIAL AND NON CUSTODIAL SENTENCES AND
ALSO FINE AND GOOD BEHAVIOUR BOND UPON FINDING A CRIMINAL
RESPONSIBILITY ON A PERSON CHARGED WITH AN OFFENCE
• THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICES HAVE DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE PRISON AND
HOLD HIGH-RISK PRISONERS SEPARATELY IN A MAXIMUM SECURITY WING
AWAY FROM THE LOW RISKS PRISONERS AND JUVENILES AND WOMEN
PRISONERS, AND RUN VARIOUS SKILL BASED PROGRAMS TO REHABILITATE
PRISONERS TO PREPARE THEM TO RETURN TO COMMUNITY UPON SERVING
THEIR JAIL TERM