By Alric Lindsay
This afternoon, September 5, 2024, Chief Magistrate Hernandez sentenced a yacht captain and his female partner for smuggling two Ethiopians, illegal landing and failing to complete disembarkation. The man and woman were sentenced differently based on their roles in the events in Cayman Brac.
Sentencing details
Concerning the sentences, Chief Magistrate Hernandez outlined that the man and woman were found guilty of offences under sections 66, 98, and 105(1) of the Customs and Border Control Act.
Section 66, this states:
66. (1) A person who, in contravention of this Act and whether for financial or material benefit or not, assists or facilitates the transportation, harbouring or movement into or out of the Islands, of an individual commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of fifty thousand dollars and to imprisonment for seven years.
(2) Subsection (1) applies to anything done (a) in the Islands; or (b) outside the Islands by a body incorporated under the law of the Islands.
The sentences for human smuggling under this section were 4 years for the man and 40 months for the woman.
Chief Magistrate Hernandez explained that the man received a harsher sentence because he orchestrated the events, i.e., he was the “brains” of the operations.
Concerning the next charge, section 98 of the Customs and Border Control Act states:
98. (1) Subject to subsection (4), a person who, disembarking in or leaving the Islands, fails to complete and hand to an officer, immediately on arrival or departure, a disembarkation card or embarkation card, as the case may be, in the prescribed form commits an offence.
(2) It is the duty of the Director to cause records to be kept and maintained of the entry of all persons into, and the departure of all persons from, the Islands.
(3) Without prejudice to anything contained in the Evidence Act (2021 Revision), any such record shall be received in evidence in any court or in any tribunal in the Islands as evidence, prima facie, of any entry or particular entered therein.
(4) Subsection (1) does not apply to any person or category of persons specified in regulations as being exempt from the requirements of those regulations, and the duty of the Director under subsection (2) shall not apply in respect of any person or category of persons so exempted.
Sentencing under this section resulted in 6 months for the man and 4 months for the woman.
Regarding the final guilty count, section 105 of the Customs and Border Control Act states:
105. (1) A person who (a) lands or attempts to land in the Islands; (b) does any act preparatory to landing in the Islands; or (c) remains or resides in the Islands, where such landing, preparing, remaining or residing is or would be in contravention of this Act, commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of twenty thousand dollars and to imprisonment for five years.
The man was sentenced to 18 months and the woman to 12 months.
Regarding all of the foregoing sentences, Chief Magistrate Hernandez noted they would run concurrently.
In addition, Chief Magistrate Hernandez ordered the vessel be forfeited and seized and said their child travelling with them would become a ward of the UK court.
Court hears of bad treatment of Ethiopians
Delivering the sentences, Chief Magistrate Hernandez described an account of how the Ethiopians fled their country for their safety. She highlighted that they were “starved, forced to work and called racial names such as monkey” by the boat captain and his partner.
Chief Magistrate Hernandez explained that the Ethiopians were only discovered in a locked cabin after Customs and Border Control officers noted to the boat captain that they would need to search the yacht.
Since then, it has been reported that the boat captain and his wife have refused to cooperate with Cayman authorities and acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Cayman courts.
It is open to the man and woman to appeal the case.
Note to readers: The Court ordered today that, due to a child being involved in this matter, the parties’ names must not be published. This includes references on social media or newspapers that could directly or indirectly identify the child.
