Ofu-Koloi v The Queen

This case concerned an appeal from the Supreme Court of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea, where the appellant, Ofu-Koloi, had been convicted of unlawfully and indecently dealing with a European girl under the age of fourteen years, contrary to section 5(2) of the White Women's Protection Ordinance 1926-1934 (Papua). The central dispute revolved around whether the prosecution had sufficiently established that the girl was "European" as required by the offence.

The legal issues before the court were twofold: first, whether the trial judge had erred in finding sufficient evidence that the girl was European, particularly in light of section 71A of the Evidence and Discovery Ordinance 1913-1952 (Papua), which allows a court to determine a person's racial classification if evidence is insufficient; and second, the proper interpretation of the term "European" within the context of the Ordinance. The appellant argued that the term was vague and that the prosecution had failed to provide adequate evidence of the girl's European status.

The High Court held that the term "European" in the Ordinance should be understood in its broad, vernacular sense, referring to racial origin from stocks associated with the continent of Europe, without known admixture of other stocks. The court reasoned that while section 71A of the Evidence and Discovery Ordinance permits a judge to determine racial classification based on observation when evidence is insufficient, it did not apply in this instance because sufficient evidence of the girl's European status was ultimately provided through the testimony of her parents, who were of Australian origin, and the judge's observation of the child as a fair white child. The court affirmed that such terms are not to be interpreted in a strict scientific or technical sense but rather as commonly understood by the community.

The appeal was dismissed, with the High Court affirming the decision of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea.