Wickers v Director of Public Prosecutions (SA)

The Supreme Court of South Australia, constituted by Kourakis CJ, Vanstone and Stanley JJ, considered an appeal concerning the application of suppression orders in criminal proceedings. The appellant, Wickers, sought to appeal a decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions (SA) which had refused to grant a suppression order in relation to certain evidence.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Director of Public Prosecutions had erred in law by refusing to grant a suppression order under s 11 of the *Evidence Act 1929* (SA) in circumstances where the appellant argued that publication of the evidence would identify him and thereby prejudice his right to a fair trial. The Court was required to determine the proper interpretation and application of s 11, particularly in relation to the balancing of the public interest in open justice against an individual's right to a fair trial.

The Court reasoned that s 11 of the *Evidence Act 1929* (SA) confers a broad discretion on the Director of Public Prosecutions to make suppression orders where it is necessary to prevent prejudice to the administration of justice or for any other reason. However, the Court emphasised that this discretion must be exercised judicially, taking into account all relevant considerations. In this instance, the Court found that the Director had failed to properly consider the potential prejudice to the appellant's right to a fair trial, which was a significant factor in the balancing exercise. The Court affirmed the principle that the right to a fair trial is a fundamental aspect of the administration of justice and that measures to protect this right, including suppression orders, should be given due weight.

The Court allowed the appeal, quashed the Director's decision, and remitted the matter back to the Director of Public Prosecutions for reconsideration in accordance with the reasons of the Court.