R v Williams (CR 65 of 2021) [2024] SCSC 155 (31 July 2024)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SEYCHELLES Reportable CR65 12021 Prosecution In the matter between THE REPUBLIC (rep. by Hemanth Kumar) and FRANCIS WILLIAMS (rep. by Clifford Andre) Accused Neutral Citation The Republic v Francis Williams (CR65/2021) delivered on 31 July 2024 Before: Vidot J Summary Importation of a controlled drug namely cocaine contrary to and punishable under section 5 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 2016, read with the Second Schedule of the said Act. Heard: Delivered: 17 July 2024 31 July 2024 SENTENCE VIDOT J [J] The Accused stands charged with the offence of importation of a controlled drug contrary to and punishable under section 5 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 20 J 6 ("MODA") read the Second Schedule of the said Act. The particulars of offence are that on the 07tl1 June 2021, at the Seychelles International Airport, the Accused who is 45 years old and of Sierra Leone Nationality, was found importing into Seychelles a controlled drug substances having a total net weight of 718,13 grams with a purity content of 453.4 grams of cocaine. [2] Thereafter, Counsel for the Prosecution read the facts to the Court. In a nutshell, as part of its profiling examination, the Immigration Authorities at the airport with the assistance of the Drug Squad of the Police, the Accused was selected for questioning. After a body search was done, he was taken to Seychelles Hospital for further test where he was scanned and foreign objects was found in his body. He was then placed under police observation who wanted to mount a controlled delivery operation. That proved unsuccessful as no person tried to make contact with him. Later he excreted the cylindrical shaped capsules which contained the drug. The Accused admitted the facts and was accordingly convicted. [3] Counsel for the Accused proceeded to ask for a Probation (Pre-Sentence) Report ("the Report"). The Report was served on Counsels prior to mitigation. [4] In mitigation, Counsel for the Accused pleaded to Court to show leniency on his client who has pleaded guilty and therefore shown remorse and saved the Court's precious time. This has saved the inconvenience of witnesses having to testify before COUlt. Counsel then presented numerous cases to illustrate the type of sentences imposed for similar offences. These include Republic v German Dixie (CO 50/2022)[20231 SCSC208 where the accused was sentenced for 5 years imprisonment for importation of 4164 grams of cocaine, Republic v Erneranthia Holder (CR46/2018)[2018] SCSC(09 April 2018) where the accused imported 986.4 grams of heroin with a purity of 404 grams and was sentenced to years imprisonment, Republic v Petrus Vermuelen (COI07/2021)[2022] SCSC 508, the accused was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment for conspiracy to import grams of heroin and Republic v Esther Bwire (C042/2019)SCSC23 (17th January 2020) wherein the accused was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment for importing 252.4 grams of cocaine with a purity of 196.87 [5] The Probation Officer who prepared the Report interviewed the Accused. The Accused confessed to have known that he was carrying drugs to the Seychelles. He explains that following an accident whereby he was hospitalised for almost a year, he had difficulty carrying on with his business in the material construction field. He had been promised US$20001-. He adds that though he knew he act was illegal, he still decided to take a bold risk. He said he did so as he was facing financial difficulties. He needed to provide for his family. [6] When deciding on the appropriate sentence, I shall consider both the submission In mitigation and the Report. [7] Indeed, a guilty plea will earn the Accused credit as far as sentence is concerned. Blackstone's Criminal Practice (2012), paragraph E.12 p2148 provides that a guilty plea would in effect earn an accused a reduction in sentence as it saves time of the court and reduces considerable cost and in the case of an early plea, saves inconvenience of witnesses having to give evidence before court, and therefore that "reduction should be a proportion to the total sentence imposed calculated by references in which the guilty plea was indicated, especially at what stage of the proceeding. " Another consideration, is to be found in section 49 of the MODA that lists "admission of the charge through a guilty" plea and the fact that "no person 'was directly harmed by the offence" as mitigating factors in support of a reduction in sentence. [8] However, in terms of section 48(a) of MODA, the offence is aggravated. This is due to the quantity of drugs that was found on him. This is a serious offence for which MODA prescribes a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of SR I,000,000.00. [9] Despite all the sympathy I have for the Accused who according to the Report lost his only son during the time that he was being remanded, but to be involved in criminality is never an option. I do understand that sometimes poverty can drive one into illegal activities but that should never be an option. The Accused confirms that he knew what he was being involved in but took a risk. That risk did not payoff. Such a quantity of drug, if it had reached the market would have been detrimental to many vulnerable people. If criminality is the path that one adopts, then that person has to face the consequences. [10] Drugs remains a serious threat to our society. We cannot afford to be complacent. A sizable portion of the young generation is degenerating before our eyes. Our country is plagued with many social ills, many of which the root cause is drugs. We need to arrest the source and send a clear message to the dealers and importers. The conviction that we will not allow this jurisdiction to succumb to this insidious cancer should be reflected in the sentence that this Court imposes. In Republic v Godson Nwezi and Noeline Namatovu CR368/2023, this Court imposed a sentence of 10 years imprisonment for trafficking and importation of 500 grams of cocaine. In Republic v Nellie Kawinga (CR80/2023) (26 May 2024) the Court imposed a sentence of 15 years for importation of 874.33 grams of cocaine. In other similar cases this Court has imposed similar sentences. [11] In meeting out sentence, I bear in mind that the classic principle of sentencing deterrence, prevention, rehabilitation, reformation and retribution; see Lawrence IS v Republic [1990J SLR 47. I shall also take into consideration the principle of proportionality of sentence. [12] After, considering all mitigating factors, I sentenced the Accused to a term of9 years and 6 months imprisonment. ; [13] Since the offence is aggravated, the Accused shall not be entitled to remission. [14] Time spent on remand shall be deducted against the sentence. [15] If unsatisfied with this sentence, the Accused may appeal against the same within 30 working days from today. Signed, dated and delivered at Ile du Port on 31 July 2024 4