Chief Commissioner of Police v Crupi & Anor

[2024] HCATrans 19

[2024] HCATrans 019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Melbourne  No M83 of 2023

B e t w e e n -

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Applicant

and

VINCENZO CRUPI

First Respondent

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

Second Respondent

BEECH‑JONES J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA AND BY VIDEO CONNECTION

ON MONDAY, 8 APRIL 2024, AT 9.59 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

HIS HONOUR:   In accordance with the Court’s practices where there are hearings remotely, I will announce the appearances for the parties.

MS S.J. MAHARAJ, KC appears for the applicant.  (instructed by Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office)

MR C.T. CARR, SC appears as amicus curiae.

HIS HONOUR:   As I understand, the respondent to the application has been notified, but has not attended.  Is that correct, Ms Maharaj?

MS MAHARAJ:   Correct, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  All right.  Well, I have the application and the affidavit.  As I understand, Mr Carr has that as well.  Is that correct?

MS MAHARAJ:   Correct, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   All right.  Now, the only substantive question I have is the point I raised earlier, that the additional material that is to be filed, how much of that material is there?

MS MAHARAJ:   In total, 137 pages only, your Honour.  Before I address that, can we respectfully seek two adjustments to the suppression order?

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.

MS MAHARAJ:   The first one is in paragraph 1(a).  We would invite your Honour to add the words “paragraphs 14 to 24 inclusive of” before the words “the confidential affidavit”.

HIS HONOUR:   So, it is just those paragraphs?

MS MAHARAJ:   Correct, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Thank you.

MS MAHARAJ:   And the second, we request a carve‑out in respect of order 1, to the effect that order 1 does not apply to the amicus.  The amicus will have access to all confidential material referred to in order 1 for the purposes of this proceeding.

HIS HONOUR:   I understand.

MS MAHARAJ:   Yes.  And may I now address your Honour’s question?

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.

MS MAHARAJ:   The additional material to be filed today in an indexed and paginated form comprises examples only that illustrate the point that the material the amicus contends has not been disclosed has in fact, in substance, been disclosed, and this in turn is referenced in the amended special leave application at paragraphs 55 to 65, and the additional bundle only comprises 137 pages.

HIS HONOUR:   I see.  All right.  Pursuant to what you just announced, as I understand it, that material will be accessible by the amicus.

MS MAHARAJ:   Correct, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   All right.  Noting that you, I assume, read the affidavit, but subject to the proposed regime for confidentiality of Detective Inspector Morse, is that correct?

MS MAHARAJ:   Yes, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   All right.  Just bear with me.  Mr Carr, do you wish to say anything about the application with the amended orders?

MR CARR:   Not in that amended form, no.

HIS HONOUR: Thank you. All right. Listed before me today is an application seeking a suppression order under subsection 77RE(1) of the Judiciary Act.  Consistent with section 77RD, the application was heard in open court.  That said, the nature of the interests sought to be protected relate to information, that is, there is a concern it would lead to the identification of an informer.  In those circumstances, I am somewhat limited in explaining the reasons for the making of the suppression order.  It suffices to state that the making of orders protecting the identity of such persons is a long well‑established practice, in that the relevant threat to the administration of justice and the potential concern about a person’s safety are obvious from the nature of their status.

In support of the application, an affidavit was read, sworn by Ms Sara Morse, a Detective Inspector of the Victorian Police.  The salient parts of that affidavit bear out the comments that I have already made.  Accordingly, I am satisfied, in terms of section 77RF(1), that the proposed order is necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice and to protect the safety of a person.  Accordingly, I make the following orders and I will read them on to the record:

1.A suppression order pursuant to section 77RE(1) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) prohibiting the publication or other disclosure of the material in:

(a)paragraphs 14-24 of the confidential affidavit dated 5 April 2024 accompanying the application;

(b)paragraphs 55-65 of the amended application for special leave to be filed by the applicant in accordance with order 1 of the orders made by the Court on 14 March 2024; and

(c)the additional material to be filed in accordance with order 1 of the orders made by the Court on 14 March 2024, including to the first and second respondents, on the grounds that it is necessary to do so to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice and to protect the safety of a person.

2.Order 1 is to operate throughout the Commonwealth of Australia.

3.Orders 1 and 2 are to operate for the period of 10 years or further order of the Court.

4.Any requirement to serve the material referred to in order 1 on the first and second respondents is to be dispensed with.

5.Order 1 does not apply to preclude the provision of the material the subject of that order to the legal representatives of the amicus.

Ms Maharaj, those orders will be taken out and you can just check any particular infelicities in the wording.  Is there anything further?

MS MAHARAJ:   Simply for your information, your Honour, the amended special leave application does not involve a rewrite of the original application.  It simply adds a page and a bit which sketches the material that the Chief Commissioner says has already been disclosed in response to the amicus’ submissions.  We have nothing further to add, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  Mr Carr?

MR CARR:   No, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:   Yes.  Can I thank you both for your assistance.  The Court will adjourn.

AT 11.07 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED