Navaneeth Ponnambalam v The State of Western Australia

[2013] HCASL 155

NAVANEETH PONNAMBALAM

v

THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

[2013] HCASL 155
S323/2012

1. The applicant was convicted in the District Court of Western Australia (Goetze DCJ) on a number of counts of stealing choses in action, being the right to withdraw sums totalling $401,086.13 from various financial institutions, contrary to s 378 of the Criminal Code (WA). On 23 March 2012, Goetze DCJ sentenced the applicant to eight years imprisonment, with eligibility for parole after six years. The applicant applied to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia for leave to appeal against his conviction.

2. On 8 November 2012, the applicant filed an application for removal of the cause then pending in the Court of Appeal to this Court, pursuant to s 40 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth). The application for removal relates to the applicant's extradition from New South Wales to Western Australia and to his examination before the commencement of his trial by the Australian Crime Commission ("ACC"), following a summons issued under s 28(1) of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth).

3. In that regard, the applicant contends that his extradition to Western Australia was contrary to ss 106, 107 and 118 of the Constitution because, inter alia, it was made under "false pretences" in relation to "offences not known to law or common law". It is also said that the powers conferred on the ACC to summon witnesses for examination are contrary to the separation of powers and impinged on the applicant's right to a fair trial, which was said to be generated by Ch III of the Constitution.

4. The claims made by the applicant concerning his extradition and those concerning the ACC's powers and their impact on the applicant's trial establish no basis for fragmenting the ordinary appeal process. The applicant does not identify any question arising under, or involving the interpretation of, the Constitution which would warrant the removal of these proceedings to this Court for determination. Any questions raised in the application may be dealt with by the Court of Appeal. The application should be dismissed.

5. Pursuant to r 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

S.M. Kiefel
4 September 2013 P.A. Keane