AG -v- Bhojwani [2009] JRC 216 (09 November 2009)

AG -v- Bhojwani [2009] JRC 216 (09 November 2009)

The Attorney General of Jersey complied with the Co-operation Law in obtaining evidence from Nigeria and India. The Nigerian authorities' subsequent lack of power under Nigerian law does not affect the admissibility of evidence in Jersey. There was no abuse of executive power, no breach of the specialty principle, and no unfairness to the defendant. The Nigerian judgment is not binding on Jersey and does not require exclusion of the evidence. The application for a stay and for exclusion of evidence (other than PG/1) is dismissed.

Citation
[2009] JRC 216
Parties
Prosecution: Attorney General for the Bailiwick of Jersey; Defendant: Defendant (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
09 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Application for Stay and Exclusion of Evidence
Outcome
Application for stay and exclusion of evidence (other than PG/1) dismissed.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Mutual Legal Assistance, Admissibility of Evidence, International Comity, Sovereignty, Money Laundering
Criminal Law International Law Evidence Law Abuse of Process Mutual Legal Assistance Admissibility of Evidence International Comity Sovereignty +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General for the Bailiwick of Jersey

Prosecution

Defendant (unnamed)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Application for Stay and Exclusion of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution should be stayed as an abuse of process due to evidence obtained from Nigeria and India allegedly in breach of international law and domestic law of Nigeria.
  2. 2 Whether evidence obtained via letters of request for investigation can be used in prosecution without explicit consent under Article 4(4) of the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation)(Jersey) Law 2002.
  3. 3 Whether the statement PG/1 should be excluded under Article 76 of the Police Procedures and Criminal Evidence (Jersey) Law 2003 due to alleged unlawfulness in its procurement.

Ratio Decidendi

The Attorney General of Jersey complied with the Co-operation Law in obtaining evidence from Nigeria and India. The Nigerian authorities' subsequent lack of power under Nigerian law does not affect the admissibility of evidence in Jersey. There was no abuse of executive power, no breach of the specialty principle, and no unfairness to the defendant. The Nigerian judgment is not binding on Jersey and does not require exclusion of the evidence. The application for a stay and for exclusion of evidence (other than PG/1) is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for stay and exclusion of evidence (other than PG/1) dismissed.

Orders

  • The trial will proceed as scheduled.
  • The Nigerian and Indian evidence (other than PG/1) is admissible.