Havea v The Queen - [2017] NZHC 1426

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2016-092-5315 [2017] NZHC 1426

LUIGI HAVEA

v

THE QUEEN

Hearing: 19 June 2017

Appearances:

M Kan, F Pereira and J Yang for L Havea
G R Kayes, L Radich and H Benson-Pope for the Respondent

Judgment:

26 June 2017

JUDGMENT No 2 OF PALMER J (FAIR TRIAL RIGHTS)

This judgment is delivered by me on 26 June 2017 at 9.45 am pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

..................................................... Registrar / Deputy Registrar

Counsel/Solicitors:
Kayes Fletcher Walker, Manukau
Michael Kan Law Limited, Auckland

HAVEA v R [2017] NZHC 1426 [26 June 2017]

Summary

[1] Mr Luigi Havea is on trial for kidnapping and manslaughter. He says that, on

1 June 2017, the Crown violated his fair trial rights by allowing his trial files to be interfered with while he was remanded in custody during trial. Some of them went missing. He seeks a direction requiring his presence, should the prison authorities wish to move him from one cell to another during trial.

[2] I consider the Court has jurisdiction to consider allegations of, and make directions to remedy, breaches of the legal rights of a prisoner, remanded in custody and on trial, in ways which impact on fair trial rights. Allowing documents being used to conduct a defence to be interfered with, or to be taken away, on 1 June 2017 was inconsistent with Mr Havea’s right to adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence under s 24(d) of the Bill of Rights. But the breach was cured by time. I do not consider Mr Havea has demonstrated the Crown’s breach of s 24(d) caused irremediable prejudice to the fairness of his trial. I decline to make the direction sought but I direct the Crown to file and serve an affidavit explaining what happened, what measures have been put in place to ensure it does not happen again and what measures have been taken to ensure Mr Havea’s safety.

Facts

[3] Mr Luigi Havea is charged with the kidnapping and manslaughter of Ms Jindarat Prutsiriporn on 29 February and 1 March 2016. He is remanded in custody. The trial started on 1 May 2017. The Crown finished presenting its evidence on 23
June 2017.

Complaint

[4] On Friday 2 June 2017 Mr Kan, for Mr Havea, drew to my attention a written complaint Mr Havea proposed to make to the Department of Corrections about his property at the Mt Eden Correctional Facility being moved:1

My belongings Court files for our trial and papers were missing due to them moving my property out of my original cell 13, and around to other cells.

People were also going through my court papers while I was at Court . . .…

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 Havea v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Havea v The Queen [2017] NZHC 1426
Case: [2017] NZHC 1426
Decision Date: 26 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mr Luigi Havea is on trial for the kidnapping and manslaughter of Ms Jindarat Prutsiriporn. He claims that on 1 June 2017, the Crown violated his fair trial rights by allowing his trial files to be interfered with while he was remanded in custody during trial. Some of the files went missing. He seeks a direction requiring his presence, should the prison authorities wish to move him from one cell to another during trial. The legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the court has jurisdiction to consider allegations of breaches of the legal rights of a prisoner, remanded in custody and on trial, in ways which impact on fair trial rights, and whether the Crown's breach of Mr Havea’s right to adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence caused irremediable prejudice to the fairness of his trial. The court considered the Courts are not expert in, or responsible for, the management of prisons. But they are responsible for considering, and ruling on, allegations of breaches of the legal rights of prisoners by those who manage prisons. The Bill of Rights sets out legal standards to which prison authorities are held. If a prisoner, on remand and on trial, alleges that prison authorities are breaching those legal standards, and thereby impacting on fair trial rights, the court considers the trial court has jurisdiction to consider the allegation and, if required and if possible, to remedy it. The court found that allowing documents being used to conduct a defence to be interfered with, or to be taken away, on 1 June 2017 was inconsistent with Mr Havea’s right to adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence under s 24(d) of the Bill of Rights. But the breach was cured by time. The court did not consider Mr Havea has demonstrated the Crown’s breach of s 24(d) caused irremediable prejudice to the fairness of his trial. The court declined to make the direction sought but directed the Crown to file and serve an affidavit explaining what happened, what measures have been put in place to ensure it does not happen again and what measures have been taken to ensure Mr Havea’s safety.

Orders