High Court upholds 18-year sentence in child sexual abuse case

The High Court has upheld an 18-year prison sentence imposed on a man convicted of sexually abusing his former wife's eight-year-old sister.

The case relates to offences committed in 2013 and 2014, during which the man was found to have shown the child explicit photographs and videos and subjected her to sexual abuse by touching her with sexual intent.

The matter was first reported to the authorities by the child's mother in 2015. The victim reported the abuse again in 2021.

The Prosecutor General's Office filed charges on 9 October 2023, accusing the man of committing a sexual offence against a minor while occupying a position of trust.

On 29 April 2025, the Criminal Court found him guilty and sentenced him to 18 years' imprisonment.

The defendant appealed the conviction to the High Court on 15 September 2025, arguing that the Criminal Court had relied primarily on the victim's testimony and that there were no eyewitnesses or other direct evidence proving the offences.

He also argued that statements given by the victim's family members, including his former wife, were false and that the allegations had been fabricated.

In addition, the defence claimed that recording the victim's testimony in court was contrary to the Act on Special Procedures for Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse, which provides for the recording of testimony from minors outside the courtroom.

The state responded that the victim had already reached the age of 18 when she testified before the Criminal Court in August 2024 and was therefore required to give evidence in court.

The prosecution also submitted that delays in reporting child sexual abuse are common and that the victim's account remained consistent with earlier disclosures and other evidence presented during the trial.

In a unanimous judgment delivered by a three-judge bench on Tuesday, the High Court found no grounds to overturn the conviction.

The court noted that the appellant had alleged the case was motivated by resentment from his former wife after he married another person, but had failed to produce evidence supporting that claim.

It also held that if the defence believed there were inconsistencies in the victim's account, it was the defendant's responsibility to present evidence to establish those inconsistencies during the trial.

The High Court further noted that the defence had not objected in the Criminal Court to the victim giving evidence in court, and therefore could not raise the issue for the first time on appeal.

The court concluded that the Criminal Court had properly assessed the evidence and upheld both the conviction and the 18-year prison sentence.