A defendant acquitted in the District Court can, with rare exceptions, treat the matter as closed. The Act is deliberately asymmetrical: the defendant may always appeal, the State almost never.
The bar
Except as provided in Subsection (3), Subsection (1) shall not be deemed to authorize an appeal by the State against the dismissal of an information.
The Magistrates’ Manual draws the consequence: any error in the acquittal of an accused for a criminal offence is automatically resolved in favour of the accused. The informant, the police prosecutor and the State are all caught. A person convicted, on the other hand, may always appeal, whatever the offence.
The constitutional background
No person who shows that he has been tried by a competent court for an offence and has been convicted or acquitted shall again be tried for that offence, or for any other offence of which he could have been convicted at the trial, except upon the order of a superior court made in the course of appeal or review proceedings relating to the conviction or acquittal.
The Constitution permits a retrial ordered on appeal, so section 219(2) is a legislative choice, not a constitutional necessity. Parliament has chosen not to give the State an appeal against a District Court acquittal, while the Supreme Court Act does give the Public Prosecutor a limited right in respect of National Court acquittals; see can the State appeal an acquittal. Section 162 adds the practical bar: a certificate of dismissal, produced, bars any further information for the same matter.
The Attorney-General’s exception
Where, in the opinion of the National Court, the matter is one of such public importance that leave should be granted, the Secretary for Justice [now the Attorney-General] may (a) appeal against a decision of a District Court on behalf of a party; or (b) intervene in an appeal to the National Court.
This is the one route by which the State can bring an acquittal before the National Court. It requires the National Court’s leave, on the footing of public importance, and the appeal is brought “on behalf of a party”, which the Manual reads as not requiring the party’s permission. Section 222(3) exempts the State and the Attorney-General from the recognizance on appeal. In practice it is used for points of law affecting many cases, such as the meaning of a provision on which magistrates have differed, rather than to overturn an acquittal on the facts. The annotation to the Act records that the Secretary for Justice’s functions passed to the Attorney-General under the Attorney-General Act 1989.
The Public Prosecutor’s sentence appeal
The Public Prosecutor may appeal to the National Court against any decision of the District Court as to sentence in respect of any indictable offence triable summarily under Section 420 of the Criminal Code.
So where a Principal Magistrate has tried a Schedule 2 offence summarily on the Public Prosecutor’s election and imposed a sentence the Public Prosecutor regards as inadequate, an appeal lies, and under section 230(1)(b) the National Court may increase the penalty. The right does not extend to sentences for simple offences, and it is an appeal against sentence only; the conviction is not in issue. See indictable offences triable summarily.
Who can appeal what
| Decision | Defendant | Informant / State |
|---|---|---|
| Conviction | Yes | — |
| Sentence for a simple offence | Yes | No |
| Sentence for a s 420 offence | Yes | Public Prosecutor, s 219(4) |
| Dismissal of an information | — | No, except the Attorney-General with leave on public importance, s 219(3) |
| Discharge at committal | — | No appeal; but the Public Prosecutor may indict under Criminal Code s 526 |
| Costs order against the informant | — | The informant is a “person aggrieved” by the costs order and may appeal it, as in Getsi v PNG Harbours Board [1993] PNGLR 408 |
| Civil order or dismissal | Either party, s 219(1) | |
Committal discharges
A discharge at committal is not an acquittal and the State does not need an appeal: section 526 of the Criminal Code lets the Public Prosecutor indict on the depositions regardless. Conversely, Ex parte Dyer [1967–68] PNGLR 511 holds that the National Court will not order a magistrate to commit. See the ex officio indictment.
Judicial review by the State
Section 219(2) bars an appeal; it does not bar judicial review. The State, like anyone else, may seek review of a District Court decision made without jurisdiction or in breach of natural justice, as it did in Ex parte the Acting Public Prosecutor [1976] PNGLR 344, where a magistrate’s unlawful alteration of a sentence was quashed by certiorari. Review does not reopen the merits of an acquittal, but it can set aside a purported dismissal that was a nullity. See appeal or review.
The District Courts Act is not on PacLII; it is available on vLex.
Before relying on anything here, read the current text of the District Courts Act (Chapter 40) and check for later amendments. The Act is not on PacLII; the figures and time limits quoted in this series come from the consolidation to No 8 of 2000, and the District Courts (Amendment) Act 2009 changes some of them once it is brought into operation. If a decision matters to you, get advice — start with the Office of the Public Solicitor, or find a firm in the law firms directory.