JUDICIAL SYSTEM MONITORING PROGRAMME
PROGRAMA MONITORIZASAUN SISTEMA
JUDISIÁRIU
CASE
SUMMARY | GENDER BASED VIOLENCE
Edition:
March 2015
Introduction
In
March 2015 the Women and Children’s Justice Unit (WCJU) continued monitoring
cases of gender based violence in the jurisdictions of the Dili District Court
and the Baucau District Court.
This
edition summarizes 25 cases which were tried at the Dili District Court and the
Baucau District Court.
The
25 cases comprised of 16 cases of simple offences against physical integrity
characterized as domestic violence, 3 cases of mistreatment of a spouse, 4
cases of sexual abuse against a minor, 1 case of rape and 1 case of
infanticide.
1
case resulted in a prison sentence, 5 cases resulted in suspended sentences, 1
case resulted in a fine, 9 cases were adjourned because the parties did not
respond to the summons from the court, in 2 cases the defendants were
acquitted, and 7 cases are still ongoing.
JSMP
respects the decision handed down in Case No. 0247/13 PDDIL, as this decision
was the product of years of effort by JSMP in relation to the application of
Articles 145 and 154 of the Penal Code in cases of domestic violence, which
usually only result in suspended prison sentences. JSMP hopes that this
decision can act as a reference point for future decision in cases of domestic
violence.
JSMP
believes that the public prosecutor prosecuted this case correctly, as
according to JSMP the crime of mistreatment of a spouse in Article 154 of the
Penal Code does not require evidence of repeated violence. JSMP believes
that the mistreatment of a spouse is an act that produces physical and
psychological consequences for the victim. JSMP hopes that in the future the
court can reconsider the crime of mistreatment of a spouse in similar cases.
The
information below outlines the hearings conducted:
1. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No.
0301/13.DICMR
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Jacinta Correia da Costa
Public Prosecutor
: Osorio de Deus (trainee)
Public Defender
: Agustinha de Oliveira (trainee)
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On 6 March 2015, the Dili
District Court adjourned the trial in a case of domestic violence involving the
defendant FAB, who allegedly committed the offence against his wife in Dili.
This
trial was adjourned until 16 April 2015 at 9am, because the defendant and the
victim did not appear in court after they were summoned by the court.
2. Sexual
abuse of a minor - Case No. 0683/11 PDDIL
Composition of
judges :
Panel
Judges
: Antonio Helder do Carmo
: Jumiaty Freitas
:
Maria Modesta
Public Prosecutor
: Remizia de Fatima
Public Defender
: Abilio Perreira (trainee)
Conclusion
: Ongoing
On 9 March 2015, the
Dili District Court tried a case of sexual abuse of a minor, allegedly
committed by the defendant SdG against HFJ, in Dili District.
This
trial was closed to the public. However based on information obtained from a
court clerk, after hearing testimony from the victim and witnesses, as well as
the final recommendations of the public prosecutor and public defender, the
court then adjourned the trial until 23 March 2015.
The
trial took place without the presence of the defendant as the summons did not
reach the defendant.
3. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0556/13.DIBCR
Composition of
judges :
Panel
Judges
: Maria Solania (trainee)
: José Maria de Araujo
Public Prosecutors
: Ivonia Maria Guterres and Simoa da Costa (trainee)
Public Defender
: Estaque Guterres (trainee)
Conclusion
: Sentenced to 2 years in prison, suspended for 3 years
On 9 March 2015, the Dili
District Court conducted a hearing in a case of domestic violence, involving
the defendant FA, who allegedly committed the offence against his wife in Dili.
The public prosecutor alleged
that on 23 December 2013 the defendant punched the victim once in the mouth,
slapped her four times on the left and right cheeks and choked the victim. The
victim tried to escape through the window, but the defendant pulled the victim
back in and threw her onto the floor. These acts caused the victim to suffer an
injury to her mouth, swelling to her cheeks and pain to her neck. The incident
occurred because the defendant suspected the victim of having a relationship
with another man.
The
public prosecutor alleged that the defendant violated Article 145 of the Penal
Code on simple offences against physical integrity in conjunction with Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant testified that he did not punch and choke the victim,
however he only slapped her four times on the cheek. The defendant stated that
he slapped the victim because the victim had a relationship with another man
and they had managed to settle the problem twice, but the victim kept on
committing the acts.
After
the court checked with the victim, the victim maintained the charges of the
public prosecutor and testified that the defendant often committed violence
against the victim, however the victim did not report it.
Before
making their final recommendations, the public prosecutors requested for the
court to amend the charge of simple offences against physical integrity to
mistreatment of a spouse. However, the court rejected the request of the public
prosecutor because the previous incidents were not reported.
In
her final recommendations the public prosecutor requested for the court to
impose a fine against the defendant because he was guilty of committing
violence against the victim and the defendant himself denied some of the facts
during the trial.
The
public defender requested that the court consider the guilty plea and partial
admission of the defendant regarding the charges of the public prosecutor, and that
the defendant was a first time offender and was responsible for his family. The
public defender agreed with the recommendations of the public prosecutor,
however he requested for a lenient fine to be imposed because the defendant has
a small income.
On
19 March 2015 the court concluded this matter and found the defendant guilty of
committing simple assault against the victim, based on the partial confession
of the defendant and the testimony of the victim.
Based
on the facts linked to this case, the court concluded the matter and sentenced
the defendant to 2 years in prison, suspended for 3 years, and ordered him to
pay court costs of US$20.
4. Mistreatment
of a spouse - Case No. 840/14 TDDIL
Composition of
judges :
Panel
Judges
: Jacinta Correia da Costa
: Antonio Helder do Carmo
:
Maria Solana (trainee)
Public Prosecutor
: Bemvinda da Costa do Rosario
Public Defender
: Eustaque Guterres
Conclusion
: Ongoing
On
16 March 2015, the Dili District Court tried a case of mistreatment of a spouse
involving the defendant AdCF, who allegedly committed the offence against his
wife in Dili.
In
addition to the crime of mistreatment of a spouse, the defendant was also
charged with the crime of making threats. However, the court resolved this case
and accepted the request to withdraw the complaint against the the victim.
Meanwhile the trial continued in relation to the crime of mistreatment of a
spouse.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 13 June 2013 the defendant slapped the victim
on the back of the neck, yanked the shirt of the victim, used a piece of wood
to chase the victim and threatened to kill the victim, however he was blocked
by his daughter and their son in law. These acts caused the victim to suffer
pain in the back of her neck.
On
14 June 2013 the defendant took a machete and chased the victim so he could
slash her, however he did not succeed because the victim fled and saved
herself.
On
25 November 2013 the defendant chased the victim from the home, and the victim
went and stayed at a relative’s house in Lahane. These actions traumatized the
victim. The incident occurred because the victim suspected the defendant of
having a relationship with another woman.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant for violating Article 154 of the Penal
Code regarding mistreatment of a spouse.
During
the trial the defendant testified that he did not punch and threaten the victim
and that he only verbally abused the victim. The victim maintained the charges
of the public prosecutor and testified that the defendant verbally abused her,
slapped her once on the back of the neck and yanked her shirt.
In
her final recommendations, the public prosecutor requested that the court
sentence the defendant to 3 years, suspended for 4 years.
The
public defender requested for the court to acquit the defendant from this
charge because there were doubts about the existing facts.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, the court adjourned the trial
to announce its decision on 27 March 2015 at 3pm.
5. Crime
of Rape - Case No. 1090/14 TDDIL
Composition of
judges :
Panel
Judge
: Jose Maria de Araújo (representing a panel of judges)
Public Prosecutor
: Bemvinda do Rosario
Public Defender
: Sergio Paulo Dias
Conclusion
: Acquitted
On 17 March 2015, the
Dili District Court conducted a hearing to announce its decision, and decided
to acquit the defendant ABS of the crime of rape, allegedly committed against
BMA in Dili District.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 172 of the Penal
Code regarding rape.
The
court found that the sexual relations that occurred between the defendant and
the victim were based on consent, based on the testimony of the defendant and
the victim in the preliminary hearing, because when the incident occurred in
2010 they were boyfriend and girlfriend, and they had sexual intercourse at
that time.
In
2011 the defendant and the victim had sexual intercourse and the victim became pregnant,
however because the defendant refused to take responsibility, so the victim
reported the defendant.
The
court decided that the facts did not establish and prove that on 18 September
2011 the defendant lied to the victim and took her to the forest and forced her
to have sexual intercourse.
Based
on the trial and after examining all of the facts established during the trial,
the court concluded the matter and decided to acquit the defendant.
6.
Mistreatment of a spouse - Case No. 02 47/13.PDDIL
Composition of
judges :
Panel
Judges
: Francisca Cabral
: Sri Buana da Costa (trainee)
: José Maria de Araujo
Public Prosecutor
: Ivonia Maria Guterres
Public Defender
: Umberto Alves (trainee)
Conclusion
: Sentenced to 1 year in prison
On 27 March 2015, the
Dili District Court conducted a hearing to announce its decision to sentence
the defendant MdJ to 1 year in prison, for committing the crime of domestic
violence against his wife in Aileu.
Previously,
the public prosecutor alleged that on 30 December 2012 the defendant punched
the victim four times in the head, four times on the back, kicked her twice on
her side and caused the victim to fall down. After the victim fell down the
defendant twice stomped on the victim’s waist. These acts caused the victim to
suffer swelling and pain to her head, back and waist, and the victim found it
difficult to breathe normally. This case allegedly occurred because the
defendant ordered the victim to grind corn however the victim refused because
she wanted to go to church.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant for violating Article 154 of the Penal
Code, regarding mistreatment of a spouse, and Article 35 of the Law Against
Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant testified that he did not punch the victim, he only
slapped her four times in the head and punched her once on her back. The
defendant also testified that he punched the victim because the victim told the
defendant “no-one can tell me what to do.”
In
her testimony the victim confirmed the facts in the indictment and testified
that she did not recall exactly, however on different days in different months
in a plantation the defendant used a crowbar to attempt to stab the victim, but
the defendant’s sister stopped the defendant from stabbing her.
After
the incident, the victim decided to separate from the defendant and has been
living with her parents. The victim also testified that on 16 November 2012,
the defendant punched the victim. This case was reported to the Village Chief
and resolved, however the defendant repeated his actions. The victim decided to
no longer live with the defendant, because while they were living together the
defendant tended to listen to his parents and often hit the victim.
Based
on the facts that were established in the court on 18 March 2015, the court amended
the charge from Article 154 of the Penal Code on mistreatment of a spouse to
Article 145 of the Penal Code on simple offences against physical integrity as
well as the Law Against Domestic Violence.
The
public prosecutor maintained the charges because the acts hurt the victim, and
caused the victim to decide to live separately from the defendant. However, the
court amended the article because the other acts committed by the defendant
were not reported by the victim.
In
his final recommendations, the public prosecutor requested for the court to
sentence the defendant to 1 year in prison, suspended for 2 years, because he
was guilty of committing violence against the victim. The public defender
requested for the court to impose a lenient suspended sentence because the
defendant had cooperated with the court.
The
court found that on 30 December 2012 the defendant punched the victim 4 times
in the head, and kicked the victim twice on her back which caused the victim to
fall to the ground. The court did not find that the defendant often punched the
victim or used a crowbar to stab the victim.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties the court concluded the matter
and sentenced the defendant to 1 year in prison.
The
judge stated that the court imposed an effective prison sentence because the
defendant denied the facts in the indictment, and has separated from the
victim.
7. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0035/13. PDBAU
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Afonso Carmona
Public Prosecutor
: Domingos Barreto
Public Defender
: Jose Guterres (trainee)
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On 23 March 2015 the
Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem District, adjourned
the trial of a case of domestic violence, involving the defendant JM who
allegedly committed the offence against his wife in Lautem.
The
court adjourned this trial, however it did not set a date to continue the
trial, as the court was unable to confirm the permanent address of the victim.
8. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0019/14.LASIC
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Afonso Carmona
Public Prosecutor
: Domingos Barreto
Public Defender
: José Guterres
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On 25 March 2015, the
Baucau District Court, through the mobile court in Lautem
District, adjourned the trial of a case of domestic violence involving the
defendant AP, who allegedly committed the offence against his wife in Lautem.
This
trial was adjourned as the victim did not respond to the summons of the court,
and will continue on 6 May 2015 at 2pm.
Previously
the public prosecutor requested that the court to establish a new date, and
requested for the victim to be detained in order to ensure that the trial will
be able to continue on the prescribed date, if within five days the victim does
not provide a reason for his non-attendance in court.
9. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0047/14.PDBAU
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge Afonso
: Carmona
Public Prosecutor
: Domingos Barreto
Public
Defenders
: José Guterres & Jonas H. da Costa
Conclusion
: Sentenced to 6 months in prison, suspended for 1 year.
On 25 March 2015, the
Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem District, sentenced
the defendant ES to 6 months in prison, suspended for 1 year, after he was
found guilty of committing the crime of domestic violence against his wife in
Lautem.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 25 September 2014 the defendant punched the victim
once in the head, once on the shoulder, and once above the eye. These acts
caused the victim to suffer pain to her head, shoulder and above her eye. This
case allegedly occurred because the victim and the defendant argued about
family problems.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 145 of the Penal
Code regarding simple offences against physical integrity, as well as Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence. During the trial the defendant
admitted all of the facts in the indictment, and also testified that he
regretted his actions and that the couple had reconciled after the
aforementioned incident.
On
the other hand, the victim testified that the defendant punched the victim in
the head, on the shoulder and above her eye, which caused bleeding. The victim
also testified that after the incident they reconciled.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor requested that the court impose
a prison sentence against the defendant, to prevent the same actions from
occurring again in the future.
The
public defender requested that the court consider the mitigating circumstances,
including the fact that the defendant confessed, regretted his actions, has
reconciled with the victim and is responsible for his family. He therefore
requested for the court to issue a penalty against the defendant that does not
limit his freedom.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, the court immediately
concluded this matter and sentenced the defendant to 6 months in prison,
suspended for 1 year and ordered him to pay court costs of $20.
10. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0113/13.PDBAU
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Hugo da Cruz Pui
Public Prosecutor
: Afonso Lopes
Public Defenders
: Antonia Fernandes & Juvinal Yanes Freitas
Conclusion
: Acquitted
On 25 March 2015 the
Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem District, tried the
defendant HGA for committing domestic violence against his wife in Lautem
District.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 10 December 2013 the defendant used a piece of
glass to strike the victim above her eye, causing the victim to suffer an
injury above her eye. This case allegedly occurred without a clear motive.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 145 of the Penal
Code regarding simple offences against physical integrity, as well as Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant testified that he did not strike the victim with a
piece of glass, rather they were just chasing each other around and the defendant’s
head struck the glass that was hanging along the wall of the house, which
struck the victim above the eye causing an injury.
The
victim also reinforced the testimony of the defendant that the defendant did
not strike her with some glass, but they were chasing each other and the
defendant’s head struck the glass that was hanging on the side of the house and
it fell and struck the victim above the eye, causing an injury. In addition the
victim also testified that after the incident the mother of the victim returned
from the plantation and saw that the victim was injured and bleeding, so the
mother of the victim became angry and reported it to the police.
After
hearing the testimony of the defendant and the victim, pursuant to Article 174
of the Criminal Procedure Code, the public defender requested for the court to
amend the charge from Article 145 of the Penal Code to Article 148 of the
Penal Code, involving the crime of negligent offences against physical
integrity. This request was based on the facts that the defendant did not
intend to knock down the glass that was hanging along the side of the house,
but rather the injury allegedly occurred due to the negligence of the
defendant.
After
hearing this request, the court heard the response of the public prosecutor who
agreed to the amendment, and then the court decided to amend the charge. The
court then validated an amicable agreement which was previously entered into by
the defendant and the victim, and then decided to acquit the defendant from this
matter.
11. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0144/14PDBAU
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Hugo da Cruz Pui
Public Prosecutor
: Afonso Lopes
Public Defender
: Antonia Fernandes
Conclusion
: Sentenced to 3 months in prison, suspended for 1 year.
On
26 March 2015 the Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem
District, sentenced the defendant RS to 3 months in prison, suspended for 1
year, for committing domestic violence against his wife in Lautem District.
Previously,
the public prosecutor alleged that on 9 February 2014 the defendant punched the
victim once in the nose, twice on the back and twice on her side. These acts
caused the victim to suffer bleeding from her nose, and pain to her back and
side.
This
case allegedly occurred because the defendant was very drunk and damaged goods
in the kitchen, and the victim got out of bed and admonished the defendant and
said “why are you breaking these things - they cost money.” The
defendant then became angry and repeatedly punched the victim.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 145 of the Penal
Code regarding simple offences against physical integrity, as well as Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant admitted all of the facts in the charges, stated that
he regretted his actions, testified that the couple have reconciled and
promised not to repeat his actions, against the victim or anyone else.
In
addition, the victim testified that after the incident the defendant approached
the victim and settled the matter in accordance with their custom.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor requested that the court to
punish the defendant with a fine, because the defendant had been proven guilty
of committing the acts against the victim.
The
public defender asked the court to hand down a fair punishment against the
defendant because he confessed and expressed regret for his actions, was a
first time offender and has reconciled with the victim.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, and based on the facts
established during the trial, the court concluded this matter and sentenced the
defendant to 3 months in prison, suspended for 1 year.
12. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0018/14.LASIC
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Hugo da Cruz Pui
Public Prosecutor
: Afonso Lopes
Public Defenders
: Antonia Fernandes
: Juvinal Yanes Freitas
Conclusion
: Ongoing
On 26 March 2015 the
Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem District, tried the
defendant AP for committing domestic violence against his wife in Lautem District.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 26 March 2014 the defendant used a plastic
chair to strike the right hand of the victim, and to strike her above the eye,
which caused injury and bleeding to her hand and swelling above the eye. The
defendant also tried to use a rice pestle to strike the victim but was
obstructed by his mother. The defendant also threatened to slice up his
mother’s genitals.
This
case allegedly occurred because the victim suspected the defendant of taking an
instrument used to measure buildings and selling it.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant for violating Article 145 of the Penal
Code regarding simple offences against physical integrity, as well as Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant testified that he didn’t strike the victim, but on the
contrary the victim struck the defendant with a plastic chair.
The
defendant added that the victim’s hand was injured because a piece of the plastic
chair struck her hand whilst they were jostling over the chair, and the
defendant tried to take the chair from the victim that she was using to strike
him. The defendant also testified that he did not use a rice pestle to strike
the victim and did not verbally abuse his mother.
On
the other hand, the defendant testified that he had first taken the plastic
chair to strike the victim so the victim tried to grab the chair and they were
both jostling over the chair, resulting in the the chair injuring the victim’s
hand, and she suffered serious swelling above the eye.
The
victim testified that the defendant tried to use the rice pestle to strike the
victim, however he was unable to do so because the police arrived at the scene,
and stated that the defendant also verbally abused his mother.
The
witness ASP (mother of the defendant) testified to the court that the defendant
used the chair to strike the victim, so they jostled over the chair and the
chair struck the hand of the victim and above the victim’s eye, which caused an
injury and swelling. At that time, the defendant was also injured by a piece of
the chair. She also stated that the defendant took the rice pestle and
threatened to strike the victim, however he was unable to do so because the
police immediately arrived at the scene.
In
his final recommendations, the public prosecutor requested that the court
sentence the defendant with an effective jail term, because the defendant
intended to harm the victim, the defendant had a criminal conviction in a
previous case and was currently serving time in temporary detention.
Pursuant
to Article 274 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the public defender requested
that the court to amend the charges from Article 145 of the Penal Code and
Article 35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence, to Article 151 of the Penal
Code on reciprocal offences against physical integrity. The public defender
believed that in this case the defendant and the victim were pushing the chair
at each other and it struck the victim on the hand and above the eye and also
injured the hand of the defendant.
After hearing the
testimony of the parties the court adjourned the trial until 9 April 2015, at
10am, to announce its decision.
13. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0002/14 LATIL
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Hugo da Cruz Pui
Public Prosecutor
: Afonso Lopes
Public Defenders
: Antonia Fernandes
: Juvinal Yanes Freitas
Conclusion
: Sentenced to 6 months in prison, suspended for 1 year.
On 26 March 2015 the Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem
District, tried the defendant AdC for committing domestic violence against his
wife in Lautem District.
On
26 March 2015,
The public prosecutor alleged that on 13 October 2014, the defendant used a
plate to strike the victim in the head, and kicked the victim on her side,
which caused her to fall to the ground unconscious. This occurred as the
defendant was angry at the victim for participating in a family ceremony even
though the defendant and victim had not been invited beforehand.
During
the trial the defendant chose to remain silent, while the victim maintained all
of the facts in the indictment and testified that after the incident they
reconciled and are now living as husband and wife.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor stated that the defendant was
guilty of committing simple assault against the victim. Even though the couple
have reconciled, in order to deter the defendant from reoffending in the future
he requested for the court to impose an adequate penalty.
Meanwhile
the public defender requested for the court to issue an admonishment against
the defendant because they have reconciled and he is responsible for his
family.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, the court concluded this
matter and sentenced the defendant to 6 months in prison, suspended for 1 year.
14. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 0079/14 PD BAU
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Hugo Pui
Public
Prosecutor
: Afonso Lopes
Public
Defenders
: Antonia Fernandes
: Juvinal Yanes Freitas
Conclusion
: Ordered to
pay a fine of US $60
On
26 March 2015 the Baucau District Court, via the mobile court in Lautem District,
tried the defendant JX for committing domestic violence against his wife in
Lautem District.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 22 September 2013 the defendant struck the
victim in the head many times, and punched her on the hand and chest. These
actions caused the victim to suffer swelling to her head and have difficulties
with breathing. The defendant also threatened to kill the victim. The incident
occurred because the defendant suspected the victim of having a relationship
with another man.
During
the trial the defendant admitted all of the facts in the indictment, regretted
his actions, and testified that after the incident the couple had reconciled.
Meanwhile the public prosecutor decided not to hear the testimony of the
victim.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor considered that all of the
facts had been proven based on the confession of the defendant, however he also
considered that the defendant had reconciled with the victim and is responsible
for his family. The public prosecutor therefore requested that the court impose
a fine for the simple assault. In respect to the crime of making threats, he
requested that the court acquit the defendant because the victim was willing to
withdraw her complaint.
The
public defender requested that the court to impose a fair penalty against the
defendant, because the defendant admitted his actions, was a first time
offender and has reconciled with the victim. For the crime of making threats,
the public defender agreed with the request of the public prosecutor.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, and based on the facts
established during the trial, the court concluded this matter and ordered the
defendant to pay a fine of US$ 60, to be paid in daily installments of 50 cents
for 120 days.
In
respect of the crime of making threats, based on the request of the victim, the
court decided to acquit the defendant.
15. Crime of
simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic violence
- Case No. 0186/14.ERERM.
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Antonio Helder do Carmo
Public Prosecutor
: Remizia da Silva
Public Defender
: Francisco do Rego (trainee public defender)
Conclusion
: Ordered to pay a fine of US$30
On
3 March 2015 the Dili District Court conducted a hearing to announce its
decision, and ordered the defendant BS to pay a fine instead of a prison
sentence.
The
court found that on 17 September 2014 the defendant punched the victim and
knocked her to the ground, and she required treatment for two days. This case
allegedly occurred because the younger sibling of the victim took a flowerpot
to school.
The
court considered that the crime of domestic violence is prevalent in the
community, and to reduce such criminality the court decided to impose a fine
against the defendant.
Based
on the established facts, the court ordered the defendant to pay a fine of US$
30, to be paid in daily installments of 50 cents for 2 months. The court
also stipulated an alternative penalty of 2 months in prison if the defendant
does not pay the fine.
16. Crime of
simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic violence
- Case No. 1135/14.TDDIL.
Composition of
judges :
Single
Judge
: Jose Maria
Public Prosecutor
: Hipólito M. Santa
Public Defender
: Sergio Quintas
Conclusion
: Ongoing
On 12 March 2015, the
Dili District Court tried the defendant MsdS for committing simple assault
against his wife in Dili District.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 20 December 2012 the defendant punched the
victim twice on the right shoulder, slapped the victim twice on the cheek and
kicked the victim once. This case allegedly occurred because the defendant rang
the victim, but she did not answer, and when the defendant arrived home the
victim was playing roulette.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 145 of the Penal
Code regarding simple offences against physical integrity, as well as Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant admitted all of the facts in the indictment and
testified that he punched the victim because the victim was playing roulette,
not because she didn’t answer the phone.
The
victim testified that the defendant punched her twice on the shoulder, kicked
her once on the thigh and once on the leg. The victim also testified that this
was the first time her husband has assaulted her. The court decided not to hear
the testimony of the victim because the defendant admitted his actions.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor testified that the defendant
admitted his actions and this was corroborated by the victim, so the public
prosecutor maintained the charges. Meanwhile the public defender testified that
the confession of the defendant was a mitigating circumstance, and therefore he
requested for the court to impose a fair penalty.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, the court adjourned the trial
to announce its decision on 23 March 2015 at 3.30pm.
17. Crime of
simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic violence
- Case No. 0023/14.LIMBR.
Composition
: Single
Judge
: Ana Paula Fonseca
Public
Prosecutors : Ivonia Maria Guterres &
Gustavo Moreira
Public Defender
: José da Silva
Conclusion
: Sentenced to 1 year 6 months in prison, suspended for 2 years.
In March 2015, the Dili District Court tried and sentenced the defendant FTU to
1 year and 6 months in prison, suspended for 2 years, after the defendant was
found guilty of committing domestic violence against his wife, in Liquica
District.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 27 May 2014 the defendant kicked the victim twice
on her side, kicked her once on the leg and punched the victim on the shoulder.
This case allegedly occurred because the victim would not carry their child and
left the child crying on the ground.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 145 of the Penal
Code regarding simple offences against physical integrity, as well as Article
35 of the Law Against Domestic Violence.
During
the trial, the defendant admitted all of the facts listed in the indictment and
testified that his wife was stubborn and did not want to listen to other
people, so that triggered the problem. The defendant testified that from the
incident until now they have been living together. The defendant also regretted
his actions, and promised not to have any further problems with the victim.
The
public prosecutor did not require the testimony of the victim and the witness
because the defendant admitted all of the facts in the charges.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor testified that the defendant
admitted his actions, expressed regret and promised not to have any more
problems with the victim. However, to prevent domestic violence he requested
for the defendant to be sentenced to 1 year and 6 months in prison, suspended
for 2 years.
The
public defender testified that the defendant committed the crime because they
had a misunderstanding. In addition to the defendant admitting all of the
facts, they are still living together and he was a first time offender. The
public defender therefore asked the court to issue an admonishment.
After
hearing the final recommendations, the court found the defendant guilty, and
decided to sentence the defendant to 1 year in prison, suspended for 2 years.
The court also ordered the defendant to report to the nearest police station
once a month for the next 2 years.
18. Crime
of simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic
violence - Case No. 1303/14.TDDIL
Composition
of judges : Single
Judge
: Francisca Cabral
Public Prosecutor
: Ivonia Maria Guterres
Public Defender
: Olga Barreto
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On 25 March 2015, the Dili
District Court adjourned the trial in a case of domestic violence involving the
defendant DS, who allegedly committed the offence against his wife in Dili
District.
The trial was
adjourned because the victim was ill and had only just returned from hospital,
so could not testify during the trial. Due to these obstacles the court
requested that the defendant and the victim go home, and wait to be summoned by
the court.
19. Crime of
simple offences against physical integrity, characterized as domestic violence
- Case No. 1069/14.TDDIL
Composition
: Single
Judge
: Ana Paula Fonseca
Public Prosecutor
: Osorio de Deus
Public Defender
: Agustinha de Oliveira
(trainee)
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On
6 March 2015, the Dili District Court adjourned the trial in a case of domestic
violence involving the defendant FAB who allegedly committed the offence
against his wife in Dili District.
The
trial was adjourned until 16 April 2015 at 9:30am, because the defendant did
not respond to the court summons.
20.
Sexual abuse of a minor - Case No. 307/14.TDDIL
Composition
: Single
Judge
: Jose Maria de Araújo (representing a panel of judges)
Public Prosecutor
: Lidia Soares
Public Defender
: Marcia Sarmento
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On
6 March 2015, the Dili District Court adjourned the trial in a case of sexual
abuse against a minor involving the defendant MLdC, who allegedly committed the
offence against his EXM in Dili District.
The
trial of this case was adjourned because the defendant did not heed the court
summons. The court has not yet set a new date to continue the trial.
21. Crime of simple offences against physical
integrity, characterized as domestic violence - Case No. 1153/14.TDDIL
Composition
: Single
Judge
: Jacinta Correia da Costa
Public Prosecutor
: Bemvinda do Rozario
Public Defender
: Humberto
Alves
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On
27 March 2015, the Dili District Court adjourned the trial in a case of
domestic violence involving the defendant NAb who allegedly committed the offence
against her husband in Dili District.
The trial was adjourned because
the defendant did not respond to the court summons. The trial will continue on
16 April 2015 at 9:30am.
22. Sexual abuse of a minor
- Case No. 91/14.TDDIL
Composition
: Panel
Judges
: Ana Paula Fonseca, Sribuana da Costa, Ivan Patrisio Antoninho
Public Prosecutor
: Remizia de Fatima
Public Defender
: Albino
Pereira
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On 26 March
2015, the Dili District Court adjourned the trial in a case of sexual abuse
against a minor involving the defendant FdCB who allegedly committed the
offence against LdCS in Dili District.
The
trial was adjourned until 6 May 2015 at 3pm, because the defendant did not
respond to the court summons. The court stated that the defendant will be fined
if he does not explain his absence within five days, and the court ordered for
the defendant to be detained to ensure that the trial can take place.
23.
Sexual abuse of a minor – Case No. 251/14.TDDIL
Composition
: Panel
Judge
: Jose Maria de Araújo (representing a panel of judges)
Public Prosecutor
: Reinato Bere Nahak
Public Defender
: Marcia Sarmento
Conclusion
: Trial adjourned
On 26 March 2015, the Dili
District Court adjourned the trial in a case of sexual abuse against a minor
involving the defendant VS, who allegedly committed the offence against TS in Dili
District.
The trial was
adjourned until 18 June 2015 at 2pm, because the victim did not respond to the
court summons.
24. Mistreatment of a
spouse - Case No. 737/14.TTDIL
Composition
: Panel
Judges
: Ana Paula Fonseca, Ivan Patrisio Antoninho, Albertina Neves
Public Prosecutor
: Nelson de Carvalho
Public Defender
: Marcal Marcarinhas
Conclusion
: Ongoing
On
26 March 2015, the Dili District Court conducted a hearing in a case of
mistreatment of a spouse involving the defendant FX who allegedly committed the
offence against his wife in Liquica District.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 28 October 2010 a farmer with the initial T
met with the victim and asked if the husband of the victim was home, and the
victim answered that her husband was home. At that time the defendant was home
and heard the conversation between the victim and T. The defendant came out and
asked the victim about this, however the victim did not respond, so the
defendant punched the victim.
On
27 November 2011 the defendant repeatedly slapped the victim on her left cheek,
and punched her once in the head, kicked her twice on the back, burned the
victim’s hand with a cigarette butt, stabbed the victim in the head with a
piece of wood and used a rice pestle to punch the victim in the back and kicked
the victim in the genitals. This case allegedly occurred because the victim was
having an affair with their neighbor.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant with violating Article 154 of the Penal
Code regarding mistreatment of a spouse and Article 35 of the Law Against
Domestic Violence.
During
the trial the defendant testified that the facts in the indictment were not
true because the defendant did not burn the victim’s hand with a cigarette
butt, and did not use a rice pestle to strike the victim and did not use a
piece of wood to strike the victim. The true facts were that the defendant
kicked the victim in the genitals which caused swelling, and slapped and
punched her.
In
his final recommendations, the public prosecutor requested that the charge to
be amended, based on the testimony of the victim and the defendant, because the
defendant did not strike the victim regularly. This was the first time that the
defendant struck the victim.
After
considering the mitigating circumstances, including the fact that the defendant
cooperated with the court and that there was good communication between the
victim and the defendant, even though they are still living apart he requested
for the court to impose a suspended jail sentence.
The
public defender agreed with the public prosecutor to amend the charge, in
accordance with the statement of the victim and the defendant. The public
defender therefore requested that the court to hand down a lenient penalty
against the defendant.
After
hearing the final recommendations of the parties, the court adjourned the trial
to announce its decision on 8 April 2015 at 3pm.
25.
Crime of infanticide - Case No. 1236/14.TDDIL
Composition of judges
: Panel
Judges
: José Maria
de Araujo, Francisca Cabral, Maria Modesta
Public
Prosecutor
: Vicente Brites
Public Defender
: Olga Nunes
Conclusion
: Ongoing
On 27 March
2015, the Dili District Court conducted a trial of a case of infanticide,
involving the defendant AdS in Ermera.
The
public prosecutor alleged that on 29 October 2013 at approximately 5am the defendant
had a stomach ache so she went to the toilet to urinate, but suddenly gave
birth. However because she lost a lot of blood the defendant became
unconscious. After 30 minutes the defendant woke up and saw the baby moving and
the umbilical cord was wrapped around the baby’s neck. The defendant then
unwrapped the umbilical cord, carried the baby into her room and cut the cord.
At
9am the family of the defendant took the defendant and the baby to the
hospital. However at 1pm the baby passed away. The autopsy showed that the baby
died because the umbilical cord was severed manually.
The
public prosecutor charged the defendant for violating Article 142 of the Penal
Code on infanticide.
During
the trial the defendant testified that the facts in the indictment were true,
because at that time she gave birth to a baby who she had been carrying in her
womb for just six months. At that time the defendant wanted to urinate, however
suddenly the baby was born, then the defendant took the baby to her room and cut
the umbilical cord. The baby managed to survive for 8 hours, however the baby
died at precisely 1pm at the hospital.
The
witness JdS, who is the defendant’s aunty, testified that all this time they
didn’t know that the defendant was pregnant. They only found out when the baby
was born.
In
his final recommendations the public prosecutor requested for the court to
sentence the defendant to 3 years in prison, suspended for 4 years. The medical
report showed that the baby died because the umbilical cord was severed
manually and the defendant could have requested the assistance of another
person.
The
public defender requested for the court to acquit the defendant because the
indictment of the public prosecutor was only based on the autopsy, however on
facts the baby was only carried in the womb for 6 months. The defendant did not
have the intention of killing her baby, and the defendant also tried to
breastfeed her baby however her baby was not able to drink her mother’s milk.
Therefore, the elements of this crime did not fulfill the requirements set out
for the crime of infanticide.
After
hearing the recommendation of the parties, the court adjourned the trial until
14 April 2015 at 11 am.
For
more information, please contact:
Luis
de Oliveira Sampaio
Executive
Director JSMP
E-mail
Address: luis@jsmp.minihub.org
Telephone:3323883
| 77295795
Website:
www.jsmp.tl
Face
book: www.facebook.com/timorleste.jsmp
Twitter:
@JSMPtl
=========================================================
This article was sent to you by the Judicial System
Monitoring Programme (JSMP). Through the provision of independent legal
analysis, court monitoring and community outreach activities JSMP aims to
contribute to and evaluate the ongoing process of building a strong and
sustainable justice system in Timor Leste. Visit our website at http://www.jsmp.tl
JSMP does not guarantee the content or endorse the views contained in articles distributed the list other than in respect of those publications prepared by JSMP itself.
To subscribe send a blank email to:
list-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (Daily News and JSMP Publications)
jsmpreports-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (JSMP Reports)
justiceupdate-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (JSMP Justice Updates)
media-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (JSMP Press Releases
JSMP does not guarantee the content or endorse the views contained in articles distributed the list other than in respect of those publications prepared by JSMP itself.
To subscribe send a blank email to:
list-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (Daily News and JSMP Publications)
jsmpreports-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (JSMP Reports)
justiceupdate-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (JSMP Justice Updates)
media-subscribe@jsmp.minihub.org (JSMP Press Releases
