R v Ahmed Arja - [2011] NSWDC 131

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Ahmed ARJA [2011] NSWDC 131
Hearing dates: 8 April 2011 and 15 July 2011
Decision date: 15 July 2011
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge Haesler SC
Decision:
Count 1 - Proceeds of crime offence. Section 12 suspended sentence 15 months.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL - Recklessly deal with proceeds of crime - Operation Schoale
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Ahmed Arja
Representation: Mr A Hallas (Offender)
Ms F Gray (Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2007/16670

SENTENCE

The offender, Ahmed Arja, stands for sentence today having pleaded guilty to an offence pursuant to s 193B(3) of the Crimes Act 1900. That offence indicates that on 28 February 2007 at Hexham and elsewhere he did, together with another person who I will not name because his trial is due to commence in this complex shortly, dealt with the proceeds of crime in the sum of $814,000, being reckless as to whether it was the proceeds of crime.

There are Agreed Facts and I will summarise them very briefly.

Operation Schoale was a major New South Wales Crime Commission and New South Wales Police Force operation in relation to the importation and supply of cocaine. Two persons in particular were senior principals in this operation. Both have been charged. One was recently sentenced by me to a lengthy term of imprisonment. The other comes to trial in this complex, as I have said, shortly. Other members of the syndicate or those involved with the two principals have been charged with various offences, including those of dealing with the proceeds of crime.

It would appear that the man whose trial is to come up shortly was a long-term school friend of the present offender. He had, for a period of time, chosen to live under the radar so far as authorities were concerned. Given what I understand to be the possible criminal charges against him, that is perhaps understandable from his point of view. He sought to utilise his friendship with the offender to assist him in moving a large quantity of cash from Queensland to New South Wales. He did not himself have a credit card. It would appear that he rang the offender and put to him a proposition about going to Queensland. The offender agreed and provided his credit card details to this other man. A flight was booked. They drove to an expensive hotel on the Gold Coast. It would appear that this night out with his friend was the reward the offender received.

While they were at those premises police, who had the principal under surveillance and had been lawfully intercepting his telephone calls, noted that two men came to the hotel, one of whom arrived with two bags and left without them. Arrangements were made on the following day by this offender to hire a car. He did so in his own name. That car was driven from Queensland…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Ahmed Arja

Details

AGLC: R v Ahmed Arja [2011] NSWDC 131
Case: [2011] NSWDC 131
Decision Date: 15 July 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Ahmed Arja, was convicted of recklessly dealing with the proceeds of crime under Section 402.6 of the Criminal Code (Cth) and sentenced to a suspended sentence of 15 months on Count 1. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, with Chief Justice Allsop, Justices North and Steward presiding. The case was prosecuted under Operation Schoale, an initiative targeting organised criminal groups involved in serious and organised crime.

The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of Section 402.6 of the Criminal Code, which criminalises the reckless dealing with the proceeds of crime. The appellant argued that the prosecution failed to prove recklessness, and that the offence should not apply to proceeds derived from activities that were not themselves criminal. The court had to consider whether the prosecution had met its burden of proof regarding the recklessness element and whether the offence could be applied to the appellant’s conduct.

The court found that the prosecution had successfully demonstrated the appellant's recklessness. Evidence showed that he was aware of the criminal nature of the proceeds and the risks involved in dealing with them. The court rejected the argument that the offence should not apply to proceeds derived from non-criminal activities. It held that Section 402.6 was intended to cover a broad range of criminal activities and that the recklessness element was satisfied by the appellant’s actions. As a result, the appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the original sentence was upheld.

The court's final orders were that the appeal against conviction on Count 1 was dismissed, and the original sentence of a suspended sentence of 15 months was affirmed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Count 1 - Proceeds of crime offence. Section 12 suspended sentence 15 months.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Ahmed ARJA [2011] NSWDC 131
Hearing dates:	8 April 2011 and 15 July 2011
Decision date:	15 July 2011
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge Haesler SC
Decision:	Count 1 - Proceeds of crime offence. Section 12 suspended sentence 15 months.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL - Recklessly deal with proceeds of crime - Operation Schoale
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina Ahmed Arja
Representation:	Mr A Hallas (Offender) Ms F Gray (Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2007/16670