Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions E-Newsletter Issue 40 ...
Transcript of Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions E-Newsletter Issue 40 ...
Office of the Director of
Public Prosecutions
‘To No One Will We Sell, To No One Deny or Delay Justice’ Chapter 40, Magna Carta 1215
E-Newsletter Issue 40
September 2014
IN THIS ISSUE September 2014- Issue 40
Page 1
EDITORIAL TEAM
Mrs Zaynah Essop, State Counsel Mr Ashley Victor, Public Relations Officer
Mr Nitish Bissessur, LRO Mr Toshan Rai Bundhun, LRO
Mr Yashvind Kumar Rawoah, LRO Mr Ajmal Toofany, LRO
We look forward to hear about your comments/suggestions on:
Editorial Pg 2
Appointment of Honourable Mr Iqbal Maghooa and Honourable Mrs Gaitree Jugessur-Manna as Puisne Judges
Pg 3
Disability Rights Today: The challenges of disability inclusion
Pgs 4-5
ADN: L’Analyse génétique des caractères morphologiques apparents Pg 6
Visit of ‘Youth leadership training program’ participants at the ODPP Pg 7
Advocacy Training by Mrs Maura McGowan QC Pgs 8-9
Advocacy highlights Pg 10
Mauritius 2014 Chevening Scholars announced Pg 11
Tribute to late Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien, former Chief Justice and DPP Pg 12
Summary of Supreme Court Judgments – August 2014 Pgs 13-14
EDITORIAL
September 2014- Issue 40
Dear Readers,
As we reach the third term court session, Honourable Mr Iqbal Maghooa, former Deputy DPP and Honourable
Mrs Gaitree Jugessur-Manna, former Master and Registrar, have both been appointed as Puisne Judges of the
Supreme Court. We seize this opportunity to congratulate them and to wish them all the best as they embark in
their new career. Mr Vignesh Ellayah, State Counsel at the ODPP, has been awarded the Chevening scholarship to
pursue an LLM in International Banking and Finance at the University College London.
In August 2014, the officers of the ODPP followed a one-week advocacy training by Mrs Maura McGowan QC. At
the same time, we were honoured by the visit of the Youth Leadership Training Program participants from
Madagascar. On his part, Professeur Doutremepuich paid a courtesy visit to us and he gave a short presentation
on the recent developments in the field of DNA.
Mr Mervyn Anthony, trainee at the ODPP, addresses the issue of disability rights and the challenges of disability
inclusion. We also pay tribute to late Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien, former Chief Justice and DPP, who passed away
on 31st July 2014. Lastly, we provide you with a summary of the latest Supreme Court judgments for the month of
August 2014.
We wish you a pleasant reading.
Zaynah Essop
State Counsel
Page 2
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 3
Appointment of Hon. Mr Iqbal Maghooa and Hon. Mrs Gaitree Jugessur-Manna as Puisne Judges
The Supreme Court of Mauritius has two more judges. They are former Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Mr. Iqbal Maghooa and former Master and Registrar Mrs. Gaitree Jugessur-Manna. They took oath before the President of the Republic of Mauritius on 8th September 2014.
Hon. Justice Mohammud Iqbal Maghooa Honourable Mr Justice Mohammud Iqbal Maghooa studied LLB with Honours at the University of Mauritius. He came out first at the Bar Vocational Examination in 1991 and was awarded the Sir Raymond Hein Award. He was subsequently called to the Bar in Mauritius in October 1992 after completing his pupillage in England and France. Hon. Justice Maghooa joined the Attorney-General’s Office in 1993 where he served as State Counsel, Senior State Counsel, Principal State Counsel, Assistant Parliamentary Counsel and Assistant Solicitor-General before being appointed Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions. The newly appointed judge was also a part-time lecturer at the Faculty of Law and Management of the University of Mauritius on criminal and revenue laws. He was also involved, at regional level, with the COMESA and SADC particularly in the formulation of the Protocol for the setting up of a Customs Union, the Customs Management Regulations and the establishment of the COMESA Court of Justice and the SADC Tribunal. As former Deputy DPP, he mainly dealt with administrative issues and was head of the Fraud and Tax Unit.
Hon. Justice Gaitree Jugessur-Manna Honourable Gaitree Jugessur-Manna, former judge in Bankruptcy and Master& Registrar obtained her LLB with Honours in 1991 at the University of Mauritius. She was ranked 3rd in the Bar Vocational Exams on the same year and was awarded a scholarship to do pupillage in the UK and in France. Mrs Justice Jugessur-Manna joined the State Law Office on the same year as her new brother judge but served also as Ag. District Court Magistrate from 1994 to 1996. She then came back to the State Law Office where she was appointed Senior State Counsel, Principal State Counsel, Assistant Parliamentary Counsel and then Assistant Solicitor-General. In 2000, she worked as Chief Legal Adviser for the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) for six months before coming back to the State Law Office. Mrs Justice Jugessur-Manna was appointed Judge in Bankruptcy and Master& Registrar in 2012. At the State Law Office, she gave legal advice to different Ministries and Governmental Departments and Parastatal bodies. She appeared for the Government in civil cases and for the State on several occasions including murder trials before the Assizes.
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 4
DISABILITY RIGHTS TODAY: The challenges of disability inclusion
People with disabilities are among the most vulnerable individuals of our society and the majority of them are constantly exposed
to injustices. In line with the ambition of making Mauritius a regional legal hub it is important to enhance our brand image as a
“disability rights friendly state” with the required “Awareness Raising” to inspire creative change towards attitudes, policies,
campaign and legislations that will promote disability-inclusive development and disability rights enhancement to support the
fulfillment of the economic, social, cultural, sport, political and civil rights of persons with disabilities. At the Office of the Director
of Public Prosecutions we are proud to contribute to the raising of awareness to foster the development of a disability-inclusive
society as part of our ethical commitment to support the requirements regarding “justice for all”.
The way forward towards the global enhancement of disability rights and inclusion of disabled people was launched on 20th
December 1993 with the adoption of the Standard Rules on the Equalization of opportunities for disabled persons by the United
Nation General Assembly. These rules were not legally binding but constituted the basis for the development, enhancement and
implementation of disability-related policies and the enactment of statutes to set up and reinforce Disability Rights. These rules
therefore were the foundational blueprint to foster the development of strategic measures for the promotion of equalization of
opportunities for persons with disabilities that have finally led towards the development and adoption of the current United
Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which is binding on the state.
Disability rights are human rights and justice in relation to these rights must not only be done but it must be seen to be done. The
achievement of a disability friendly democratic state involves maximizing the efficiency of existing legislations with the required
amendments regarding the promotion, protection and enhancement of disability rights as well as the development and enactment
of new ones in line with our societal requirements. At this stage the Training and Employment of Disabled Persons Board
(TEDPB) Act as amended in 2012 has a major drawback that should be addressed. Part II of the schedule (Section 13) of the
Amendment Bill states that upon failure to comply with the requirements of this Act employers will have to pay a monthly fine of
MUR 4000 for each disabled person they failed to recruit. The fine payable for contravention at this stage should be reviewed to a
compelling amount with the required additional amendments in both the TEDPB Act 2012 and the Employment Rights Act 2013
in order to incite employers to abide to their responsibility to employ the required applicable quota of disabled persons at every
level within their organizations.
The decision making process regarding the enactment of legislations and policy making should involve the heavy participation of
Disabled Persons in order to maximize disability-empowerment ideas, leadership, creativity, innovation and commitment to reach
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 5
the most efficient decisions to support disability empowerment. According to section (O) of the preamble of the United Nation
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), “the State Parties to the Convention need to consider that
persons with disabilities have the opportunity to be actively involved in decision-making processes about policies and programs,
including those directly concerning them”.
Politics is at the heart of major decision making process regarding the state including the setting up of disability empowerment
policies and the enactment of disability friendly legislations as well as specific legislations for disability empowerment. In our
quest to become a reliable and business friendly legal hub in the region, it is the duty of the state to abide to the requirements of
the UNCRPD because the issue of Disability Rights is a question that will foster our pride and leadership in the region and
particularly in Africa. Mauritius has a leading role to play in Africa and our targeted status of legal hub will definitely reinforce
our leadership in the eyes of Africa and the world. As a democratic state we therefore need to ensure that the ongoing electoral
reform are disability inclusive with the inclusion of a specific and logic percentage for the proportional representation of persons
with disabilities in parliament.
According to official sources available from the United Nation, Mauritius has signed and ratified the United Nation Convention
on the Right of Persons with Disabilities but only signed the optional protocol which has not yet been ratified. Ratifying the
optional protocol is a key requirement of a democratic state that is targeting the status of legal hub. Change is the only thing that
is constant in a contemporary democracy and the global mindset on disability is and has been constantly evolving. Ratifying the
Optional Protocol is a key requirement for disability rights enhancement in Mauritius. It is therefore a matter of national pride
and leadership for Mauritius to lead by example with the ratification of the said protocol.
The issue of accessibility is another key issue that should be addressed by building promoters and building owners in Mauritius so
as to comply with the statutory requirement of section 3 (a) (ii) of the Building Control Act on accessibility which imply that the
needful should be done to ensure accessibility for person with impaired mobility and communication so that they are able to
access and use the building as well as the facilities within the building comfortably.
It is in the interest of Mauritius as a state to promote disability inclusive developments and disability rights enhancement as
highlighted above in order to strengthen our global brand image as a disability friendly state; thereby paving the way to achieve
our target as a business engine and a promising legal hub to attract investments for maximizing the creation of wealth in Africa.
Mervyn Anthony
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 6
ADN : L'analyse génétique des caractères morphologiques apparents
La visite du Professeur Doutremepuich du laboratoire de Bordeaux au bureau du DPP n'a pas laissé nos officiers
indifférents. En effet, cette sommité en matière d'ADN a tenu à s'adresser aux membres du bureau sur les progrès de la
recherche et les nouvelles formes d'analyses qui sont en ce moment même développées.
"Je dis souvent que nous ne sommes qu'à l'âge de pierre en ce qu'il s'agit de l'ADN. On commence maintenant et on a encore
tout à trouver", nous dit le Pr Doutremepuich. Les progrès sont toutefois remarquables. Une analyse d'ADN peut révéler
tant d'informations, tels que, la couleau de la peau, des cheveux ou des yeux. "Dans un futur proche, on pourra faire un
portrait robot du suspect avec le rapport d'analyse", explique le Professeur.
Les analyses peuvent identifier l'ADN dans des milieux hostiles. "Nous avons déjà trouvé de l'ADN sur une victime restée
dans l'eau et nous l'avons identifié. Le suspect habitait non loin du lieu", nous confie-t-il. Et d'ajouter que l'ADN résiste à
100 degrés. "On arrive à retrouver de l'ADN sur des allumettes ou des vêtements brulés", explique le Professeur.
Autre avancée importante: la rapidité des analyses et des résultats. Le Professeur Doutremepuich soutient qu'il peut traiter
un dossier en 24 heures ou 48 heures. Il précise toutefois que tout dépend de la complexité de l'analyse et de l'échantillon
prélevé. Selon lui, un dossier criminel doit être fait plus rapidement qu'un autre dossier.
L'expert met toutefois en garde contre les risques de contamination des échantillons d'ADN. Il explique que la
contamination peut être faite sur le lieu du prélèvement, durant le déplacement de l'échantillon ou même au laboratoire. Le
Professeur est pour plus de contrôle. "Il y a plusieurs contrôles au laboratoire. Nous faisons même des contrôles sur les
contrôles pour être sûr que tout va bien", explique le Pr Doutremepuich.
Ashley Victor
Public Relations Officer
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 7
Visit of the "Youth Leadership Training Program" participants at the ODPP
The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions welcomed on 22nd of August 2014, a delegation of participants of the “Youth
Leadership Training Program” (YLTP) who were in Mauritius for a study tour.
The YLTP is a training program designed and implemented by the Office of the Madagascar Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. It
consisted of:
• National Representative of FES Madagascar,
• The main trainer of YLTP,
• Assistant YLTP Program.
• Other young participants
These young contributors were professionals of 25-38 years, from different areas such as civil society, media, private sector,
political parties, public sector, amongst others. The goal of the program is to encourage the emergence of new generations of
Malagasy makers who are engaged in developing the required technicalities as well as a sense of ethics.
The main purpose of their visit at the Office of the DPP was to exchange information on the functioning and role of the Director
of Public Prosecutions as the main actor of good public governance in Mauritius. There was a presentation made by Mr Iqbal
Maghooa , then Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions together with Mr Denis Mootoo, Ag Assistant Director of Public
Prosecutions in which they enlightened the audience about the functions and powers of the DPP under the Constitution of
Mauritius. They also laid emphasis on the structure of the ODPP.
Yashvind Kumar Rawoah, Legal Research Officer
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 8
Advocacy Training by Mrs Maura McGowan QC
The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) had the pleasure of welcoming Mrs Maura McGowan QC for a 4-day
workshop on Advocacy held at the Rajsoomer Lallah Lecture Hall from 18th August to 21st August 2014.
Mrs McGowan QC was called to the Bar at the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple in 1980. She is a criminal lawyer and is
equally experienced in corporate, tax, charity and mortgage fraud. Due to her notoriety, Mrs McGowan appeared in several
landmark cases such as R V Potts and Others: The largest ever SFO prosecution of a housing fraud namely a Ponzi scheme arising
out of Practical Property Portfolios in the North East. She has also appeared successfully in a number of infanticide trials. She
took silk in 2001 and was subsequently nominated Deputy High Court Judge in 2010. In the year 2013, the Bar Council elected her
as Chairman. Mrs McGowan QC was also named Director of Education and Training for the South Eastern Circuit and a serving
member of the Criminal Bar Association. She was also called to the Irish Bar.
Mrs McGowan gave invaluable advice on key issues such as Ethics and vulnerable witness. "You can't talk to a child as if you were
talking to an adult." Mrs McGowan stressed on the importance of ethics in the profession. She talked about vulnerable witnesses
and the fact that some barristers may bully them. She said that it is the role of the prosecution counsel to intervene whenever this
happens. In an adversarial system like ours, it is important to prepare the case thoroughly and anticipate any question for the
defence.
Securing a conviction
"How to secure a conviction? It's simply by proving each and every element of the case. And when you decide to prosecute
someone, you already know that you can win the case or else you would not have started it at the first place", she explained.
DNA
Mrs McGowan has also valued the importance of DNA. She said that accused parties were more inclined to plead guilty especially
in sexual offence cases when DNA was properly used. She said that jury was more likely to believe the scientific evidence that is
becoming more and more reliable.
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 9
Defence statements
To prevent "defence by ambush", Mrs McGowan suggested that the use of a defence statement might be fair for the prosecution.
Such defence statement would include the witnesses and expert witnesses they intend to call, how long they think the trial is
going to take, and including the summary of the defence case.’ The duty to disclose information is incumbent both to the
prosecution and to the defence as a matter of fairness.
Swindling and Embezzlement
Mrs McGowan was not the only one intervening during the training week. Mr Armoogum and Mrs Nathire-Beebeejaun talked
about Embezzlement and how to tackle some of the issues arising in these cases. Mr Rammaya and Ms Soochit eventually
discussed the different aspects of the offence of swindling in the law and how to draft information in these types of cases.
Intervention of Hon Eddy Balancy, Ag. CJ
The Acting Chief Justice Eddy Balancy addressed to the participants about the pitfalls of state counsel and attorneys before the
Supreme Court. He talked about appearances in chambers and appearances in first instance cases and application for judicial
review and appeals. He insisted that barristers and attorneys should always have a copy of the Judge in Chambers Rules 2002.
Honourable Justice Balancy also explained that following the visit of Sir Anthony Hooper, he has been working on a way to
implement case management policy in our Courts. A good case management would result to less delay before the court.
Ashley victor, Public Relations Officer & Toshan Rai Bundhun, Legal Research Officer
September 2014- Issue 40 Advocacy 2014 - Highlights
Page 10
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 11
Mauritian 2014 Chevening Scholars announced
The British High Commission in Mauritius recently announced that Vignesh Ellayah, State Counsel at the Office of the
Director of Public Prosecutions, has been selected for the prestigious Chevening Scholarship. The scholarship is awarded to
talented professionals who have demonstrated the potential to become future leaders across a wide range of fields. It is fully
funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and covers one year of post-graduate studies in a British university. He
will start his courses in the UK this September.
British High Commissioner Jonathan Drew said:
“The Chevening scholarship is a prestigious award and, since 1986, has benefitted many of the best and brightest talents in
Mauritius. They return to Mauritius with enhanced skills and are in an ideal position to put their expertise at the service of
Mauritius. I wish Vignesh a very fruitful experience in the UK.
Vignesh will study for an LLM in International Banking and Finance Law at University College London. He has been
working as State Counsel in the Office of the DPP since 2012. On receiving his award, he said:
“I feel deeply honoured to have been awarded the Chevening Scholarship for an LLM in International Banking and Finance
at the University College London. This scholarship gives me an invaluable opportunity and privilege to become part of the
prestigious Chevening network. Being a Chevening Scholar will allow me to broaden my global outlook, build a network of
like-minded professionals from all over the world and learn from the very best. It will undoubtedly be a life changing
experience for me, both personally and professionally.”
The other selected candidate was Mr Yamal Matabudul who will study for an MSC in Higher Education at the University of
Oxford.
Toshan Rai Bundhun, Legal Research Officer
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 12
Tribute to late Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien
Former Chief Justice and DPP
Sir Maurice Latour-Adrien departed this world at the age of 99 on the 31st July 2014. He was a role model for many and was
respected for his wisdom, humility and hard work. Sir Maurice was also a perfect gentleman according to his
contemporaries. He was also known as being pious and for his spiritualism. In fact, he spent a lot of time praying at the
Mont Carmel monastery.
The Supreme Court decided to pay tribute to the former Chief Justice on the 3rd September 2014. The Attorney General, the
Director of Public Prosecutions and the judges and members of the bar and the law society were present at the ceremony.
Although few of the lawyers present appeared before him, Sir Maurice has made an important contribution to the
Mauritian jurisprudence. One of his famous decisions is in the case of Regina v Siatous [1974 MR 100] where he stated in
appeal that the co-existence of provocation and premeditation is possible.
Sir Maurice was also the first Director of Public Prosecutions of Mauritius following the constitutional changes of 1964
where the Attorney General became a political appointee and the office started to operate like a Ministry. The supervising
officer of the Attorney General's Office was at the time the DPP and later the Solicitor General.
Sir Maurice was a brilliant Magistrate and rapidly joined the Crown Law Office. He was appointed judge in 1966. He rose
rapidly and became Chief Justice in 1970. He held office for seven years and improved the premises of the Supreme Court
with the assistance of the then French Government.
After his retirement, Sir Maurice acted as legal adviser to the Mauritius Commercial Bank and was on the Board of
Directors from 1980 to 2002 and was also chairman of the Mauritius Union Assurance Co. Ltd.
SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS – August 2014
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 13
Ally J. M. E. v The State of Mauritius [2014 SCJ 283]
Chui Yew Cheong J & Teelock J.
Duty on magistrate – Pronounce conviction before sentence
The Appellant was prosecuted before the district court under 3
counts of an information as follows: (a) failing to provide
specimen of his breath for a breath test; (b) failing to provide a
specimen or blood or urine for laboratory test; and (c) driving
with a proportion of alcohol in his blood which exceeded the
prescribed limit. The Appellant initially pleaded not guilty but
he then changed his plea. The information was read over to
him anew and he pleaded guilty. However the learned
magistrate did not record whether he had pleaded guilty to all
3 counts. After having explained to the Appellant his rights,
the learned magistrate proceeded straight away to sentencing
him without pronouncing sentence.
At the appeal, the court held that ‘it is now settled law that
pursuant to section 72(2), a conviction is a condition precedent
to the sentence and where the Court omits to convict and
proceeds to sentence, the sentence will be quashed. (See Callee
v. The Queen [1970 MR 97]). Since the decision in Callee, this
Court has held in a number of cases of the requirement
imposed by section 72(2) to convict before proceeding to
sentence. (See The Director of Public Prosecutions v. The
District Magistrate of Black River and Ors [1972 MR 217],
Rajabally v. The Queen [1982 MR 122], Desvaux de Marigny v.
The Queen [1982 MR 182]).’
The Appellate Court further held that, in the interests of
justice, a retrial ought to be re-ordered under section 96(5) of
the District and Intermediate Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction)
Act. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the sentence was
quashed and the case was remitted to the lower court for a
retrial.
Mautadin v The State [2014 SCJ 300]
Hamuth J & Teelock J.
Additional grounds of appeal outside delay
The Appellant was prosecuted before the district court for the
offence of driving an autocyle on a road with the proportion of
alcohol exceeding the prescribed limit. He pleaded not guilty
and he was represented by counsel. He was sentenced to pay a
fine of Rs 20,000, to undergo 6 months’ imprisonment, ordered
to pay Rs 100 as costs, he was further disqualified in relation to
all types of vehicles for a period of 8 months and his driving
licence was cancelled and endorsed.
He appealed against conviction only. He had initially appealed
against sentence only. Subsequently he filed 3 additional
grounds of appeal. However, before the day of the hearing,
counsel for the Appellant indicated in her skeleton argument
that she was not insisting on the first initial ground as well as
the first two initial grounds so that she would argue only the
third additional ground.
The respondent, after giving notice, has raised a preliminary
objection to the effect that the appeal should be set aside
because it was not prosecuted within the statutory delay as
prescribed by Section 93 (3) of the District and Intermediate
Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act (The Act).
The Appellate Court stated that it is possible for an appellant
who is out of time to apply for leave to appeal outside the
statutory delay by following the appropriate procedure, namely
by making a written motion with supporting affidavit evidence
setting out the grounds on which he purports to rely to seek
leave. It is well settled that the Court has a discretion which is
exercised in exceptional circumstances, to grant such a motion
and allow the applicant (appellant) to proceed with an appeal
not prosecuted timeously (vide also Curpen v State [2008 SCJ
September 2014- Issue 40
Page 14
305], Hanumanthadu v The State & Anor [2010 MR 365]).
In the present case, the Appellate Court was not in presence of
any such application for leave. In a proper case, even on the day
of the hearing of the appeal, the Court may exceptionally
entertain a verbal motion for leave. There was no such motion
either.
For reasons mentioned in the judgment, the ground of appeal
raised was not arguable so as to warrant the exercise of the
Appellate Court’s discretion in allowing the Appellant to proceed
with the argument outside delay.
The appeal was dismissed.
Judicial Committee of The Privy Council
Beezadhur v The Independent Commission against Corruption
(ICAC) and another
Lady Hale; Lord Kerr; Lord Reed; Lord Carnwath & Lord Hodge
JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY Lord Carnwath
FIAMLA-Exempt transaction-Burden of proof
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Supreme Court of
Mauritius, dismissing the appellant’s appeal against conviction
and sentence for offences contrary to Sections 5(1) and 8 of the
Financial and Anti-Money Laundering Act (‘the 2002 Act”).
Leave was granted. The two issues which was raised on appeal
was as follows: (i) On which party does the onus of proof lie
regarding the application of exemptions under section 5(2) of the
Act? & (ii) What is meant by the words “lawful business
activities” in the definition of “exempt transaction” in section 2 of
that Act?
On the first issue, it was held that the Supreme Court was right to
decide that, in accordance with section 10(11)(a) of the
Constitution, it was for the defendant to show that the
transaction was within one of the exempt categories.
To this effect, reliance was made on the cases of Police v
Moorbannoo [1972] MR 22, Police v Fra [1975] MR 157 and
Abongo v The State [2009] SCJ 1981. It was pointed out that
‘exclusivity of knowledge’ is not an essential requirement for the
application of the exception. Refering to R v Johnstone [2003] 1
WLR 1976, the following extract was quoted:
“[…] the extent to which the burden on the accused
relates to facts which, it exists, are readily provable by
him as matters within his own knowledge or to which
he has ready accessed.”
The board was of the view that the structure and content of the
statutory offence and of specific exemptions were designed to
bring into play the Edwards principles (R v Edwards 1975).
Addressing the second issue, with regards to the definition of
(lawful business activities), the board considered that a
generous approach should be taken to the availability of the
exemption under section 5(2) of the FIAMLA. The argument
put forward was based on the notion of “ strict and liberal
construction” (Bennion on statutory interpretation 5th Edn
2008) and the case of Selassie v The Queen [2013 UKPC 29]. It
was held that business can be read as meaning occupation,
profession or trade. Activities can be regarded as the
transactions involved in carrying out one’s occupation.
Although this might not be the conventional connotation, the
board was agreeable to the fact that it should be adopted.
Referring to the Oxford English Dictionary, the board was of
the view that “business activities” and “business” can both be
interpreted as in involving a commercial activity. Therefore, a
broader sense was given to the activity in which the appellant
was engaged.
The appeal was dismissed with respect to the first issue and
allowed with regards to the second one.