High Court trial ordered

Press, 2 June 1982, Page 4

High Court trial ordered

PA Auckland An Auckland High Court judge has ruled that a drugs trial, to be heard in the District Court, should be heard by the High Court in “the interest of justice." Mr Justice Holland ruled in favour of the Crown which had applied for an order for the three accused to be tried in the High Court. Mate Sinisa Paunovic, aged 34, company manager of Whangaparoa. John Reginald Davis, aged 31, contractor of Whangaparoa, and Alan Arthur Olsen, aged 35, cargo manager, of Northcote, have been charged with possessing cannabis for supply, importing cannabis, and conspiracy to supply the same drug. They had earlier been committed for trial in the District Court at Auckland. Mr Justice Holland said that under the Summary Proceedings Amendment Act, 1980, the trial of the

charges came within the jurisdiction of the lower court. However, the Crown had applied for the trial to b& transferred under section 28J of the District Court Amendment Act, 1980, and it was clear that the act placed no fetters on the discretion given to the High Court. He said it was unwise “at this early stage" to endeavour to lay down guidelines or ‘ principles about which court was more appropriate to deal with certain cases. “Each case will have to be determined on its own facts." he said. The Crown had alleged that 188 kg of cannabis had been seized with an approximate street value of $5.5 million and that the importation was one of two the three accused were parties to, his Honour said. But he did not consider the seriousness of the charges as

a matter very relevant to the application. . It was for Parliament to decide where the limitation of jurisdiction should be, he said. The fact that 78 documentary exhibits would be produced at the trial, and there would be challenges to the scientific evidence, were also not reasons to remove the trial to the High Court. However, the inclusion of the conspiracy count took the trial “out -of the ordinary," his-Honour'said. “It will involve complicated and difficult decisions which will have to be made in the inevitable pre-trial applications, and in the conduct of the trial,” he said. For those reasons he was satisfied that it was in. the interest of justice to have the trial removed from the District Court to the High Court. He made an order accordingly, &nd remanded the accused for trial to July 19.