R v Alharbi

In the case of R v Alharbi, the appellant was charged with multiple counts of child sexual abuse. The case was heard before the Supreme Court of New South Wales where the primary issue was the admissibility of an extra-judicial recorded interview statement (ERISP) of the accused. The appellant, who had a non-English speaking background, claimed that he was not informed of his rights under Part 9 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) during the interview. The court was required to decide whether the ERISP was properly obtained and whether the failure to inform the appellant of his rights rendered the interview unlawful and the statement inadmissible.

The court considered whether the appellant's rights under Part 9 of the LEPRA were properly observed during the interview. It was determined that the police had failed to inform the appellant of his right to consult with a legal practitioner before answering questions and his right to silence. The court noted that these rights are particularly important for a person from a non-English speaking background to ensure they fully understand their rights and the implications of their responses. The court held that the failure to inform the appellant of these rights was a breach of the statutory requirements and rendered the interview unlawful. As a result, the ERISP was deemed inadmissible under section 138 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

The court ordered that the ERISP obtained from the appellant during the unlawful interview is to be excluded from evidence in the trial. This decision underscores the importance of ensuring that all persons, particularly those from vulnerable backgrounds, are fully informed of their rights during police interviews. The court's ruling reinforces the need for strict compliance with statutory requirements to protect the rights of individuals and uphold the integrity of the judicial process.