Fisheries officer 'misused his powers’

Press, 26 July 1989, Page 22

Fisheries officer 'misused his powers’

A fish shop proprietor and lessee of a fishing boat said he became angry, but did not threaten a fishing officer, after the officer had said he intended to put him but of business. The shop proprietor, Constantine Kazakos, said in the District Court yesterday he considered the fishery officer had misused the powers given him by the Ministry of Fisheries. Kazakos and the skipper of his boat, the Te Ra, John Stewart Handley, are being prosecuted by the Ministry for alleged breaches of the Fisheries Act and Fishing Regulations relating to the mandatory requirement to keep aboard the vessel a fish quota log-book. After a two-day defended hearing Judge Erber reserved his decision on the six charges which Kazakos, and two which Handley, defended. Kazakos changed his plea yesterday to guilty to a seventh charge, of failing to ensure that the certificate of registration and fishing permit were' kept on board the vessel. He defended charges of obstructing, and behaving in a threatening manner to Mr P. J. O’Leary, a senior fishery officer, and of failing to comply with that officer’s lawful requirements, and encouraging two crewmen to obstruct Mr O’Leary, all on March 18, at Lyttelton. The two other charges against Kazakos, relating to March 28 at his business premises in Lincoln Road, were of behaving in a threatening manner to Mr O’Leary and failing to comply with his lawful requirements. The two charges against Handley, as master of the boat, were that he failed to complete, immediately on landing, the fisheries management catch landing log-book, and failed to produce it immediately on demand to Mr O’Leary.

Mr Hans van Schreven appeared for Kazakos. Handley was not represented- by counsel. Mr Tim Gresson prosecuted for the Ministry.

Prosecution evidence was heard on Monday. In evidence yesterday Kazakos said he went to Lyttelton at 6 p.m. on March 18 to unload the Te Ra, which had arrived from a fishing trip. It had left the port early the

previous evening but he did know of this until later that day. The day before the boat left he had taken its fishing catch log-book to his factory in Lincoln Road to dry it out, as it had been immersed in sea-water. The boat’s certificate of registration and fishing permit also were at his factory. He left the log-book behind on his desk in his haste to leave for Lyttelton, after a delay in finding the keys of his truck. The truck had been used by an employee. Driving away from the wharf with the catch in his truck, he saw a vehicle “come at me” with its lights on full. The vehicle stopped in front of his truck and Mr O’Leary approached, said he was a fishery officer and wanted to inspect his catch landing log-book. He said it was not supposed to be in his truck. He then realised it was not on the vessel and that he had left it behind, at his factory. He told Mr O’Leary he had only 56 cases of dogfish and a mixed crate of rig and school shark. Mr O’Leary said he was not interested, and if he did not have the log-book his truck and catch of fish would be seized.

He told Mr O’Leary of the circumstances in which the log-book had become waterlogged and he had taken it to his factory to dry the pages, which had stuck together. Mr O’Leary did not accept the invitation to go to the factory to see the logbook. He said he was going to “put you and your kind out of business and I’m starting with you first.”

Kazakos said he regarded this comment as a malicious threat. He asked the officer why he had made the remark and was called a name and told the officer was sick and tired of people ripping off the system.

Kazakos said he was very angry at the remark. Mr O’Leary asked for the keys of the truck but was refused them.He also called to his crew on the boat that they did not have to give the officer their details.

They returned to where the truck was parked. An employee whom he had sent at the start of the incident to get the log-

book had returned with it and the other papers.

Mr O’Leary asked for the keys of the truck but was refused them. Cross-examined, he said his view was that Mr O’Leary had misused the powers that were given to him by the Ministiy. He said he did not threaten Mr O’Leary. He might have waved his arm, and had raised his voice. Mr O’Leary pointed his finger and raised his voice at him. He said he invited Mr O’Leary to look at the fish in the truck as he had nothing illegal. He also told the officer the boat’s skipper had the fish catch for the trip recorded in his diary. Questioned by Handley, Kazakos said Handley was not aware the log-book had been removed from the boat. He agreed Handley had earlier spoken to him about the condition of the log-book as a result of which he said he would try to get a replacement log-book. Handley said in evidence that he had been engaged by Kazakos three or four days before, and the trip on March 17-18 was his first as master of the vessel. He had earlier noticed the log-book was in poor condition and suggested to Kazakos that he get another.

As far as he knew, at the time of the trip, the log-book was in his satchel with charts and other papers and marine tickets.

Only when he was asked by Mr O’Leary to produce it did he find it missing. He had not looked for it earlier to record the catch as he had entered the catch in his diary as it was loaded into the truck.

He intended making the entries in the “supposedly waterproof” log-book after moving the boat to its mooring area and drying his hands. He had just shut down the engine when Mr O’Leary went on board.

Handley said he took all reasonable steps to ensure the log-book was on the boat to be filled in at the first available opportunity after the fish was landed.

He believed the logbook was aboard, in his satchel when the boat set out.