Hon Mr Justice Cato said the security of young children in Tonga is paramount, when passing down his sentence on 7 April at the Nuku'alofa Supreme Court.

“Those who chose to offend in this way must appreciate that they risk being imprisoned for life. The Courts will protect young children from this kind of offending. Their security is the paramount sentencing considered here."

He said the prisoner when release will be under restrictions and supervision to better ensure the risk of further offending is reduced, and acted on the Crown’s request under the Family Protection Act; that the prisoner should have no contact whatsoever with the victims in this case.

This serious offending had taken place in January 2014 in Tongatapu.

Change plea

Mr Justice Cato said the prisoner had initially pleaded not guilty on all counts and maintained this when the trial began on February 29 this year, and only changed his plea to guilty on the second day of trial.

He considered a lengthy finite sentence was appropriate to the serious nature of the offending in regards to the two victims.

"The prisoner represents a serious threat to girls and there is certainty that, even when released after a long period of time in custody, he will not still represent a serious threat. It is for this reason that I think an indeterminate life sentence might be appropriate. There is no sentence of preventive detention in Tonga," he said.

The judge said the Crown, however did not support a life sentence in this case with the crown counsel submitting that it would be manifestly excessive tending to suggest that offending of this kind was not in the same category as murder.

"Parliament has determined, however that the life sentence is available for carnal knowledge offending against young children. It may, I consider sensibly be imposed where the offender demonstrates a propensity for this kind of offending and presents a continuing future danger to children."

The final 18-months of the lengthy sentence was suspended on strict restrictions based on the fact the prisoner had expressed some remorse and pleaded guilty suggesting he may rehabilitate.

It was also ordered that no publication of this judgment directly or indirectly identifies either of the complainants.