R v Matamata - [2020] NZHC 1829

PERMANENT NAME SUPPRESION FOR THE VICTIMS CONTINUES, AS PER PREVIOUS ORDER OF THIS COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NAPIER REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA AHURIRI ROHE

CRI-2018-020-003953

[2020] NZHC 1829

THE QUEEN

v

JOSEPH AUGA MATAMATA

Date: 27 July 2020

Counsel:

C R Walker for Crown R Philip for Defence

Sentencing:

27 July 2020

SENTENCING NOTES OF CULL J

[1] Mr Matamata, while I read my sentencing notes to you, you may remain seated. I will ask you to stand again at the end when I formally sentence you.1

1 These notes are the record of the oral delivery in court, with amendments made for clarity, grammatical error, repetition of phrases and oral corrections.

R v MATAMATA [2020] NZHC 1829 [27 July 2020]

[2] You appear for sentence today having been found guilty by a jury of 10 charges of human trafficking2 and 13 charges of dealing in slaves.3 The maximum penalty for trafficking is 20 years’ imprisonment and the maximum penalty for slavery is 14 years’ imprisonment. Now I sentence you on the basis of my own assessment of the evidence given at trial.4

[3]In sentencing you, I shall explain:

(a)your offending;

(b)your personal circumstances;

(c)the sentencing goals and methodology;

(d)an appropriate starting point;

(e)any adjustments for personal aggravating or mitigating factors;

(f)whether to order a minimum period of imprisonment;

(g)reparation; and then

(h)your sentence.

The offending

[4] I start then with your offending. Counsel have traversed this both orally and in their written submissions and we have heard 5 weeks of evidence during the trial.

2      Crimes Act 1961, s 98D(1)(a). Seven of the trafficking charges occurred from July 2003 and before 7 November 2015 and were laid in accordance with s 98D before the enactment of s 5 of the Crimes Amendment Act 2015 on 7 November 2015. The four trafficking charges referring to trafficking after 7 November 2015 (charges 17, 19, 21 and 23) contain the amended wording (“knowing that the entry involved deceiving” the complainant), in accordance with amended     s 98D(1)(a).
3      Section 98(1)(b), which was enacted on 1 January 1962 and subsequently amended on 3 April 2001. Although two of the slavery charges allegedly occurred prior to the 2001 amendment, in both versions s 98(1)(b) contains the same wording (“employs or uses any person as a slave, or permits any person to be so employed or used”).
4      Sentencing Act 2002, s 24.

[5] By way of an overview, from 1994, you brought Samoan nationals, some of them your relatives, others from your village, into New Zealand to illegally work for you in the horticultural industry. They were told that that they could earn significant income by Samoan standards, which they would be able to send back to their families in Samoa. Once in New Zealand, these Samoan nationals were exploited by you for your own, and that of your family’s, financial gain.

[6] Prior to the victims’ travel to New Zealand, you, either personally or through other connections,…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Matamata

Details

AGLC: R v Matamata [2020] NZHC 1829
Case: [2020] NZHC 1829
Decision Date: 27 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Joseph Auga Matamata was found guilty of 10 charges of human trafficking and 13 charges of dealing in slaves. The maximum penalty for trafficking was 20 years’ imprisonment and the maximum penalty for slavery was 14 years’ imprisonment. The court assessed the evidence and found that Matamata had brought Samoan nationals into New Zealand to illegally work for him in the horticultural industry. The victims were told they could earn significant income, but once in New Zealand, they were exploited for Matamata’s financial gain. The court found that Matamata had deceived the victims, controlled them, and did not pay them for their labour. The court considered the aggravating and mitigating factors of the offending and found that a global starting point of 12 years’ six months imprisonment was appropriate. The court also considered personal aggravating or mitigating factors, and adjustments for instrument forfeiture and cultural discount. The final sentence was 11 years’ imprisonment, with no minimum period of imprisonment required. The court also made an order for reparation in the sum of $183,000.

Orders