By Linny Folau

A widowed mother of seven, Mele Havea (35) received a suspended sentence, after pleading guilty to charges of impersonating a customs officer in Vava’u.

Acting Justice Langi sentenced her on 30 April at the Supreme Court in Nuku’alofa, after she pleaded guilty to four charges in March.

The defendant who lives in Fungamisi arrived in Vava’u in July 2023 and lived with her uncle, at his house in Leimatu'a. She stayed with Saane Kafoa, who confirmed the defendant told her she was transferred from Tongatapu to work at Vava'u Customs.

Saane also confirmed during the defendant's stay here, she would often be a tou'a (female server of the kava) at several kava clubs in Leimatu'a. Sometime between July and August, the defendant was wearing a Customs uniform and present at a faikava club in Leimatu'a as a tou'a. The defendant told people at the faikava club that she was an officer from Tongatapu. Present at that time was Alo Vulangi a customs officer in Vava'u, Amini Vea, Pati Vave and others.

The Acting Judge stated that on 11 July 2023, Detective Tapueluelu and Potesio Hefa stopped by FIAS Chinese shop to purchase a few items. Inside the shop, Potesio observed the defendant standing with the shopkeeper at the cashier counter and overheard her telling the shopkeeper that the goods were dusty, and if not cleaned by the next time she showed-up, she would close the shop.

Once the defendant exited the shop, Det. Tapueluelu and Potesio observed the defendant was not wearing the standard customs officer uniform. Instead, she was wearing a patterned puletaha with a kiekie and an identification card. The defendant left in a rental car next to the Chinese shop, JR Trading.

At JR Trading, the defendant took a damaged canned tuna and corned beef which were valued at about $42. A shop assistant named Tongaleva Hala believed the defendant was an officer because she was wearing respectable clothing and had a customs ID card. The defendant also told the Chinese shop keeper Xing, that she was an inspector from Tongatapu.  

Later that day, Det. Tapueluelu returned to Neiafu Police Station where a Chinese national named Luke was making a complaint about his rental car, which had not been paid in full. Det. Tapueluelu overheard the description of the rental car and recalled it was the same rental he had seen the defendant drive.

Police located the rental car, parked at Xiao Ting Guo Chinese Shop. Det. Tapueluelu spotted the defendant walk out of the shop with a can of baking powder.

Det. Tapueluelu invited the defendant to go to the Police Station as there had been a complaint regarding the rental car she was driving. She accompanied the Police to the Neiafu Police Station. Det. Tapueluelu went to the Customs Office and picked up Talita Fisi'ihoi, for the purpose of confirming whether or not the defendant was a customs officer.

Talita confirmed that the defendant did not work at the Customs Office in Vava'u, and she also confirmed with the main Customs Ooffice in Tongatapu that she had never worked as a customs officer. Talita further stated that as practice, customs officers must always wear their uniform while on duty.

The defendant also told Det. Tapueluelu that she was an officer from Tongatapu but was in Vava'u for work purposes.

On 12 July 2023, Police arrested and charged the defendant with the offences of impersonating a Customs officer. Police also returned with a Customs ID and a Customs uniform shirt. On the next day, she indicated to Officer Paseka that she would like to speak about her offending. The defendant was cautioned of her rights and admitted to the offending and further alleged that she did the inspections because she was told to by Alo Vulangi.

Alo on the other hand stated that the first time he met the defendant was at a faikava, where she was the tou’a. He had befriended her but during the course of their friendship, he denied ever telling the defendant or authorising her to conduct inspections at the Chinese shops in Vava'u as a Customs officer.

Suspended sentence

The court heard that the defendant expressed remorse and regret for what she did. She is a widow and a mother of young children, and was assessed that giving her a chance to be rehabilitated and to stay with her children would be beneficial for her.

Meanwhile, the Crown submitted that aggravating factors in this case were the offence of impersonating a public servant undermined the role played by the government in our society and diminished public confidence in public servants and their functions. The offending was premeditated and gained an advantage from the deception.

However, she was a first-time offender and pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity. The defendant was, to a certain extent, cooperative with the Police during the investigation.

The Crown’s position on sentencing was that based on the offending, a custodial sentencing was appropriate in this case. Count 2 was the most serious offence, the defendant had identified herself as a Customs officer despite not being one. In the other instances, the defendant only acted in a manner that would imply, she was a Customs officer. Considering the circumstances in this case the Crown submitted a starting point of for the head sentence be 30 months' imprisonment.

The judge said that the defendant had mitigating factors which is deserving of a discount.

“Crown submitted a 12 month reduction to the starting point to reflect the defendant's mitigating factors. The appropriate sentence for Count 1 and 3 is 14 months imprisonment each and the appropriate sentence for Count 4 is 10 months.

“As the offending in Counts 1, 3 and 4 arose in close progression of each other, it is appropriate for the sentences for these to be concurrent to the sentence of Count 2.

“In considering the guidelines established in Mo'unga v R [1998] Tonga LR 154, Crown was of the view that the defendant should be granted a full suspension of her imprisonment sentence. She is not young, a first-time offender and cooperated to a certain degree with the Police and at the earliest opportunity she pled guilty to her charges. This displayed a likelihood to use a suspended sentence as an opportunity to be rehabilitated. Crown proposed that her sentence be fully suspended for two years.”

First case

The Acting judge stated this was the first case of this kind in Tonga and as such, the starting point would have to be determined from the circumstances and the maximum penalty.

“The maximum penalty of $100,000 or 10 years imprisonment or both clearly demonstrates the view that our legislatures have on this type of offending.

“The fact that the accused went to four different stores and pretended to be a customs officer strongly indicates that she what she had done was intentional and likely driven by greed in hoping to earn a benefit from the shop owners. The accused is a first time offender, pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity and I accept that she is remorseful for what she had done. I do not accept that she had been influenced by her 'boyfriend' to impersonate a customs officer.

“She was already wearing a Customs uniform in the kava parties before she had met 'Alo who was a genuine Customs' officer in Vava'u. She had told several people at the kava parties that she was a Customs' officer. I therefore believe she had left Tongatapu with a Customs uniform with the intention of impersonating a Customs officer. If she had not been caught in time, she may have eventually been able to scam more out of the Chinese shop owners.

“As it is, she only received a can of corned beef. I believe a starting point of two years imprisonment is appropriate. Although she did not receive much from her actions, the fact that she did impersonate a Customs' officer is serious as it would have had more serious effects on the shop owners.”

The defendant was then sentenced to 18 months imprisonment on each count concurrent to the head sentence.

The sentence was fully suspended on the conditions: that she must not to commit any offence punishable by imprisonment, carry out 40 hours of community work as directed by the probation officer, live where directed by the probation officer and undergo a course on management and life skills, among other requirements.

The court was told that the defendant lived at her parents’s home with five of her seven children, after her husband passed away in 2018 while working as a seasonal worker in Australia, while she was still carrying her youngest child.