A 54-year-old father of four from Tailevu has been sentenced to four life terms in prison after being convicted of raping and impregnating his 15-year-old special needs step-granddaughter. The High Court in Suva issued the life sentences following the man’s guilty plea to four representative counts of rape and two counts of sexual assault, with each count of rape carrying a life sentence and each count of sexual assault earning him 10 years. His sentences will be served concurrently.
The court heard that the victim endured physical abuse, including punching and beatings with a stick, as the man threatened her with death to ensure her silence. Justice Daniel Goundar noted the severity of the crimes, stating the man exploited the girl’s disabilities for his gratification, robbing her of her childhood and well-being. The non-parole period for the sentences is set at 18 years, subject to the decision of the President upon recommendation by the Mercy Commission.
Justice Goundar emphasized the necessity of maximum sentences to reflect society’s condemnation of such heinous crimes and to deter similar offenses. He stated, “You preyed upon your granddaughter for your own sexual gratification, using violence and threats to enforce her silence, with consequences that are irrevocable.” The ruling underlines the court’s firm stance against sexual violence, especially within familial structures, warning offenders of severe repercussions.
In a related development, an application by former fisheries minister Kalaveti Ravu and the ministry’s regional northern manager, Tekata Toaisi, to stay a High Court order pending an appeal has been refused. Justice Goundar denied the application due to lack of jurisdiction, directing that such a motion must be presented to the Appellate Court.
The sentencing in the step-granddaughter’s case highlights ongoing judicial efforts in Fiji to address grave sexual offenses with stern penalties, marking a clear deterrence message to potential offenders. The ruling also serves as a reminder of the critical need for vigilance and robust protection of vulnerable individuals within communities. Cases like these reinforce the judiciary’s commitment to upholding justice and maintaining public safety.