Bassam Hamzy v Commissioner of Corrective Services (No 2)

In the case of Bassam Hamzy v Commissioner of Corrective Services (No 2), the plaintiff, Bassam Hamzy, sought to have the trial judge recuse themselves due to a perceived conflict of interest. The judge had previously prosecuted two witnesses who were intended to give evidence on Hamzy's behalf. The application was made in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The primary issue the court needed to determine was whether the prior relationship between the judge and the witnesses was sufficient to warrant the judge's recusal.

The court considered the nature of the judge's prior involvement with the witnesses, which was in a prosecutorial capacity, and the potential impact this might have on the impartiality of the judge. The court examined whether the judge's previous actions could reasonably lead to a perception of bias. The court ultimately found that the prior prosecutorial role did not create a conflict of interest that would necessitate the judge's recusal. The judge's impartiality was upheld based on the understanding that the judge would adhere to the judicial role and not be swayed by past prosecutorial decisions.

Consequently, the application for recusal was refused. The court concluded that the prior relationship did not amount to a justifiable apprehension of bias. The judge was deemed capable of presiding over the case without prejudice, and the trial continued as scheduled. The plaintiff's application was dismissed, and no orders were made in relation to the recusal application.