IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY
CRI-2015-409-125
[2015] NZHC 3277
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v
ERNEST PITOITUA TUILETUFUGA
Hearing: 17 December 2105 Appearances:
P Currie for Applicant
M Starling for Respondent
Judgment:
17 December 2015
JUDGMENT OF MANDER J
[1] The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections (the Chief Executive) has made application for an Extended Supervision Order (ESO) and intensive monitoring of Mr Ernest Tuiletufuga.
[2] Mr Tuiletufuga’s parole conditions will expire this Sunday, 20 December 2016. As part of his parole regime, he is presently subject to electronic monitoring. I have been advised that monitoring will cease tomorrow, 18 December.
[3] The Chief Executive’s application is made on the grounds that Mr Tuiletufuga has, or has had, a pervasive pattern of serious sexual offending, and there is a high risk he will in future commit a relevant sexual offence after he ceases to be an eligible offender.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v TUILETUFUGA [2015] NZHC 3277
[17 December 2015]
[4] The substantive hearing of the Chief Executive’s application is not able to be heard before the expiry of Mr Tuiletufuga’s parole. As a result, the Chief Executive seeks an interim supervision order to take immediate effect until the hearing of the substantive application for an ESO of 10 years.
[5] The application can be heard at 2.15 pm on 23 February 2016. Mr Starling who appeared on behalf of Mr Tuiletufuga advised the application will be opposed. However, he accepted that, having regard to the nature and content of the Chief Executive’s application and the material filed in support, he cannot realistically oppose the granting of an interim order until the full hearing of the application.
[6] Having read the content of the Chief Executive’s application, including the annexed material in support, I am satisfied it is appropriate to make an interim order until a full hearing of the application can take place on 23 February 2016. The conditions of the interim order will include the standard ESO conditions provided by s 107FA of the Parole Act 2002, together with the special conditions (conditions 1-11) as set out in the Chief Executive’s application. Both the standard and special conditions are annexed to this minute.
[7] Having made the interim order, I expressly note that the making of the order on an interim basis is without prejudice to Mr Tuiletufuga’s signalled opposition to the substantive application for an ESO of 10 years, the merits of which will be determined at the hearing in February.
Solicitors:
Raymond Donnelly & Co, Christchurch Michael Starling Barrister, Christchurch
Special Conditions:
1.To reside at an address approved by your Probation Officer and not to move from that, or any other approved address, without the approval of a Probation Officer.
2.To notify your Probation OWicer prior to starting, terminating or changing your position or
place of employment.
3. To notify your Probation Officer of any intimate relationship you start or resume.
4.If directed, undertake and complete appropriate relationship counselling as directed by the Probation Officer.
5. Not to consume or possess alcohol or illicit drugs.
6.Not to enter any, park, public toilets or any other location specified in writing by your Probation Officer.
7.To comply with the requirements of electronic monitoring, and provide access to the approved residence to the Probation Officer and representatives of the monitoring company, for the purpose of maintaining the electronic monitoring equipment as directed by the Probation Officer.
BTo submit to electronic monitoring in the form of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology as directed by a Probation Officer in order to monitor your compliance with the condition relating to your whereabouts.
9.If directed, undertake and complete appropriate treatmenVcounselling to address alcohol and drug issues to the satisfaction of the Probation Officer and treatment provider.
10.If directed, attend for a psychological assessment and complete any treatment/counselling to the satisfaction of the Probation Oñicer and treatment provider.
11.If required and directed by the Department of Corrections, to be subject to intensive monitoring and submit to being accompanied and monitored for up to 24 hours a day (or less if approved by a Probation Officer) by an individual who has been approved, by a person authorised by the Chief Executive, to undertake person-to-person monitoring.
- AGLC
- Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections v Tuiletufuga [2015] NZHC 3277
- Case
- [2015] NZHC 3277
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether the interim order should be granted and what conditions should be attached to such an order. The Chief Executive argued that the risk of Mr Tuiletufuga reoffending was too high to allow for any delay in implementing the ESO. Mr Tuiletufuga, on the other hand, opposed the granting of an interim order. However, he conceded that given the content of the application and the material filed in support, he could not realistically oppose the interim order at this stage. The court had to balance the risk of Mr Tuiletufuga reoffending against his right to a full hearing of the substantive application.
The court granted an interim order, effective until the full hearing of the substantive application for an ESO. The court was satisfied that the interim order was appropriate given the nature of the application and the material in support. The court noted that the making of the interim order was without prejudice to Mr Tuiletufuga's signalled opposition to the substantive application, the merits of which would be determined at the hearing in February. The court imposed the standard ESO conditions provided by s 107FA of the Parole Act 2002, together with the special conditions set out in the Chief Executive’s application.
The final orders of the court included the interim ESO and intensive monitoring of Mr Tuiletufuga, subject to the special conditions set out in the Chief Executive’s application. The substantive hearing of the Chief Executive’s application was set for 23 February 2016.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.