Herijanto,Muin,Lie v RRT

Herijanto, Muin and Lie (the appellants) appealed to the High Court of Australia against their convictions for conspiracy to import a prohibited substance, namely heroin, into Australia. The appellants were convicted in the Supreme Court of New South Wales following a trial before Hunt CJ at Common Law and a jury. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence obtained through electronic surveillance and the proper application of the law relating to conspiracy.

The High Court was required to determine whether the evidence obtained by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) through the interception of telecommunications and the use of listening devices was lawfully obtained and therefore admissible. A key legal issue was whether the provisions of the *Telephonic Communications (Interception) Act 1979* (Cth) (the Act) had been complied with, particularly concerning the necessity for warrants and the scope of lawful interception. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the trial judge had erred in admitting this evidence, thereby prejudicing the appellants' right to a fair trial.

The High Court, in its joint judgment delivered by McHugh, Gummow and Kirby JJ, found that the evidence obtained through the electronic surveillance was unlawfully obtained. Their Honours reasoned that the AFP had failed to obtain the necessary warrants as required by the Act before commencing the interceptions. The court emphasised that the strict requirements of the Act were designed to protect individual privacy and that any deviation from these requirements rendered the evidence inadmissible. Consequently, the convictions, which were substantially based on this unlawfully obtained evidence, could not stand.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the convictions, and ordered that the appellants be discharged.