| dc.concourt.synopsis |
Application for leave to appeal against the convictions and sentences of applicant and his ten companies, and the related confiscation of their assets. The Court did not hear argument on the merits of the appeal but only considered the preliminary question whether leave to appeal should be granted. The application was argued in two parts: the first related to the criminal proceedings and the second to the subsequent confiscation of assets. As to the criminal proceedings, the Court dismissed the application to introduce new evidence, as much of the evidence in question is not undisputed, and the evidence is also irrelevant to the issues to be decided by this Court. None of the applicant's arguments relating to an unfair trial were upheld. The appeal against the convictions and sentences was not granted as it does not bear reasonable prospects of success. As to the confiscation proceedings, the Court held that the applicants' submissions raise a constitutional issue. POCA must be interpreted in conformity with the Constitution, which provides that no one may be arbitrarily deprived of his or her property. The Court held that the submissions cannot be said to bear no reasonable prospects of success. Accordingly, it concluded that it is in the interests of justice for the application for leave to appeal against the confiscation order to be granted. Application for leave to appeal against the convictions and sentences is dismissed. Application for leave to appeal against the confiscation order upheld and leave to appeal granted. Judgment of the Court. |
|