R v Qaumi & Ors (No 26) [2016] NSWSC 545

R v Qaumi & Ors (No 26) [2016] NSWSC 545

Omar Ajaj had reasonable grounds to object because proposed cross-examination about association with the Brothers for Life Bankstown and a conversation about ammunition could expose him to prosecution, including under s 93T of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and s 65 of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). Because the evidence was relevant to both the prosecution case and the defence case, it was in the interests of justice to require him to answer, but he should be protected by a certificate under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), subject to the proviso concerning falsity of evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Procedural Ruling / Objection by Witness Omar Ajaj to Giving Evidence on Self Incrimination Grounds During Trial
Outcome
Objection upheld; witness required to give evidence; certificate granted under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
Legal Topics
['self Incrimination' 'certificate That Evidence Cannot Be Used Against Witness' 'witness Objection' 'cross Examination in Absence of Jury']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['self Incrimination' 'certificate That Evidence Cannot Be Used Against Witness' 'witness Objection' 'cross Examination in Absence of Jury']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial Procedural Ruling / Objection by Witness Omar Ajaj to Giving Evidence on Self Incrimination Grounds During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether witness Omar Ajaj had reasonable grounds to object to giving evidence that may tend to incriminate him.' 'Whether it was in the interests of justice to require Omar Ajaj to give the evidence despite the objection.' 'Whether a certificate should be granted under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Omar Ajaj had reasonable grounds to object because proposed cross-examination about association with the Brothers for Life Bankstown and a conversation about ammunition could expose him to prosecution, including under s 93T of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) and s 65 of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). Because the evidence was relevant to both the prosecution case and the defence case, it was in the interests of justice to require him to answer, but he should be protected by a certificate under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), subject to the proviso concerning falsity of evidence.

Court Disposition

Objection upheld; witness required to give evidence; certificate granted under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Orders

  • ['Uphold the objection made by the witness Omar Ajaj.' 'Require the witness to give the evidence.' 'Grant a certificate under s 128 of the Evidence Act 1995.']