MANRAJ D D & ORS v ICAC.pdf

7/27/2019 MANRAJ D D & ORS v ICAC.pdf

1/26

MANRAJ D D & ORS v ICAC

2003 SCJ 75

2003 MR 41

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MAURITIUS(IN CHAMBERS)

In the matter of :-

SRN: 317/03MANRAJ DHARAM DEV

App!"#$%V'

THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION A*AINST CORRUPTION

Rp+$,$%ANDSRN: 325/03

RAMDE-AR RAVI .UMAR PRASADApp!"#$%

V'


Rp+$,$%ANDSRN: 330/03

CINE NET-OR. /TDApp!"#$%

V'


Rp+$,$%ANDSRN: 331/03


2/26

CINE MA /TDApp!"#$%

V'


Rp+$,$%AND

SRN: 380/03

OCEAN VI//AS /TDApp!"#$%

V'


Rp+$,$%ANDSRN: 326/03

THE MAURITIUS COMMERCIA/ BAN. /IMITED

App!"#$%

J,$%

-HAT ARE THESE APP/ICATIONS A// ABOUT

The Independent Commission !ainst Corr"ption# $ICC% is &ond"&tin!

an a''e!ed &rimina' fra"d pro(e into the f"nds deposited () the N*+ at the ,C

.hi&h f"nds a''e!ed') ended "p fortif)in! the finan&ia' stren!th of some

&ompanies and persons ICC is an emanation of the er) ne. *reention of

Corr"ption &t 2002 $*C% and its po.ers are deried from it ate afternoon

on +rida) 21st+e(r"ar)# ICC &ame "p .ith an app'i&ation "nder se&tion 56 of

the ne. &t The pp'i&ation .as in Cham(ers (efore me It so"!ht an

tta&hment rder to atta&h the f"nds of a 'ist of 10 &ompanies and 5 indiid"a's

It .as the &ase of ICC that the f"nds had (een fra"d"'ent') transferred to those


3/26

&ompanies and persons and that those &ompanies and persons sho"'d hae

!"i't) no.'ed!e imp"ted to them

ICACS APP/ICATION FOR AN ATTACHMENT ORDER

The !ist of the pp'i&ation for the tta&hment rder .as that-

ICAC .. has reasonable ground that the . companies and

persons have received the proceeds of crime and those companies and

persons had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the sums of moneycredited to their respective accounts derived in whole and directly from a

crime and have thus committed an offence under section 3 of the

Financial Intelligence and Anti-oney !aundering Act "##".$

The other aerments are of 'esser &onse4"en&e and the) .i'' (e dea't .ith

in &o"rse of post

The app'i&ation .as e% parte# that is in the a(sen&e of the part) a!ainst

.hom the orders .ere so"!ht s per 'a.# I had to (e satisfied that the order .as

.arranted The affidaits aerred fra"d"'ent intent I en4"ired .hether the ICC

had eiden&e of fra"d"'ent intent I .as !ien to "nderstand that ICC had or

tho"!ht it had The order .as# a&&ordin!')# !ranted There .as no do"(t in m)

mind that ICC ne. perfe&t') .e'' .hat it .as doin! a'' the more so .hen the

affidaits referred to the &ompanies and persons as s"spe&ts

CHA//EN*E OF ICACS ATTACHMENT ORDER B A REVOCATION

ORDER

+ie of the &ompanies and persons .ere st"n! to the 4"i& The) .ere:


4/26

haram e ,anra9

Rai "mar Ramde.ar9

Cine Ne.or td9

Cine ,a; td9

e f"rther aers that ICC has

(een a!"e# impre&ise# "n&ertain and that the pretensions of ICC hae no

dire&t or indire&t (earin! on him persona'') and do not spe&if) in an) manner

.hatsoeer ho. he is 'ined or ino'ed .ith the a''e!ed (rea&h of the 'a.

ICC responds to the a(oe in its &o"nter-affidait () statin! 2 thin!s

spe&ifi&a''): that ICC has &ome a&ross an offi&e &he4"e to the order of

,a"riti"s Te'e&oms td for the pa)ment# amon!st others# of app'i&ant@s

te'ephone (i''s The en4"ir) has a'so reea'ed that pp'i&ant has different (an

a&&o"nts at the ,a"riti"s Commer&ia' an representin! s"(stantia' s"ms of

mone) &&ordin! to the inesti!ation# there is eiden&e that one of the s"spe&ts

in the &ase .as on or a(o"t 10 +e(r"ar) 2003 in the offi&e of app'i&ant for the


6/26

p"rpose of draftin! a 'etter in re'ation to a s"m of Rs 25 m on (eha'f of the N*+

at the ,C

The affidait a'so states that ,r Ramde.ar .as persona'') tain!

possession of the offi&e &he4"es iss"ed () ,C# that after pri' 2002# app'i&ant

persona'') too possession of offi&e &he4"es dra.n to the order of >SC and

State an of ,a"riti"s and presented to the re'eant offi&ers at the said (ans

and effe&ted s"(se4"ent on.ard transfer to other a&&o"nt in other (ans

in&'"din! oerseas (ans

CINE NET-OR. -E .NO- NOTHIN* ABOUT NPF MONE

The third app'i&ant is Cine Net.or td Its ffi&e ,ana!er and Compan)

Se&retar)# ,ohammed ashir NaAeer# has affirmed an ffidait to the effe&t that

he is the se&retar) and the shareho'ders are : r ,ohammed Sidi& Chadee# ,rs

>annah Chad) and ,r Teeren ppasam) >e aers that pp'i&ant neer had

an) dea'in! .ith the N*+ nor had he eer (een informed that this .as the &ase#

if at a'' >e aers that ICC fai'ed to spe&if) ho.# .hen# () .hom and in .hat

&ir&"mstan&es mone) a''e!ed') misappropriated .as &redited to pp'i&ant@s

a&&o"nts pp'i&ant &ha''en!es the ires of ICC in app')in! for the order

pp'i&ant a'so aers that ICC .as not empo.ered or entit'ed to app') for s"&h

an order .hi&h does not rest on an) so"nd 'e!a' (asis and is manifest')

dis&riminator)# ar(itrar)# a("sie and oppressie

ICC has rep'ied to the ersion of pp'i&ant () .a) of &o"nter-affidait

and stated that one Teeren ppasam) is one of the dire&tors Inesti!ation

reea's that Teeren ppasam) has (een ino'ed in mone) 'a"nderin! and that

this pp'i&ant has (enefited from the pro&eeds of the &rime ICC a'so hides

(ehind the &onfidentia'it) of the en4"ir) and .o"'d not .ant to dis&'ose more


7/26

CINEMA -E .NO- NOTHIN* ABOUT NPF MONE

The fo"rth pp'i&ant is Cinema;; td Its ffi&e ,ana!er and Compan)

Se&retar)# ,ohammed ashir NaAeer# has affirmed an affidait to the effe&t that

he is the se&retar) and the shareho'ders are: Doo'am han Chad)# r

,ohammed Sidi& Chadee# ,rs >annah Chad)# ,r Essan han Chad)# ,r

h"'an Chad) and ire&t *roperties td >e aers that app'i&ant neer had an)

dea'in! .ith the N*+ nor had he eer (een informed that this .as the &ase# if at

a'' >e aers that ICC fai'ed to spe&if) ho.# .hen# () .hom and in .hat

&ir&"mstan&es mone) a''e!ed') misappropriated .as &redited to app'i&ant@s

a&&o"nts app'i&ant &ha''en!es the ires of ICC in app')in! for the orderpp'i&ant has aerred that the ICC app'i&ation .as "nreasona('e# "n"stified#

dis&riminator)# ar(itrar)# a("sie# oppressie and in (rea&h of the f"ndamenta'

ri!hts

s it is .ith the third app'i&ant# so it is .ith the fo"rth ICC has rep'ied

that one Teeren ppasam) is one of the dire&tors Inesti!ation has reea'ed

that Teeren ppasam) has (een ino'ed in mone) 'a"nderin! and that

Cinema;; has (enefited from the pro&eeds of the &rime ICC .o"'d not .ant to

dis&'ose more for fear of pre"di&in! the en4"ir)

OCEAN VI//AS /%, MISTA.EN IDENTIT

&ean =i''as td is the 5thapp'i&ant Its misfort"ne .as to hae taen on

the name of a preio"s &ompan) r"nnin! () that name .hi&h had e;isted at the

materia' time It has nothin! to do .ith the fa&ts of the N*+-,C matter In this

parti&"'ar &ase# ICC fina'') &on&eded that it .as a &ase of mistaen identit)

ICC ma) &onsider itse'f '"&) not to hae earned the .rath of this pp'i&ant for

a home.or (ad') done The tta&hment rder .ith respe&t to this Compan)

.as d"') reoed# ICC not o(e&tin!


8/26

-HAT IS THE /A-

F"estions of 'a. and fa&ts .ere raised The) re'ated to pro&ed"re as .e''

as s"(stan&e +irst# as to pro&ed"ra' o(e&tions

earned Co"nse' for ICC s"(mitted that I had no "risdi&tion to &ontin"e

hearin! the Reo&ation pp'i&ations inasm"&h as it .o"'d (e as tho"!h I .as

sittin! on appea' a!ainst m) o.n findin!s of 21 st+e(r"ar) for the tta&hment

rder earned Co"nse' s"(mitted that it is some other "d!e in Cham(ers .ho

sho"'d hae the &ompeten&e to hear these app'i&ations n&e I .as satisfied.ith an e% parteapp'i&ation# .hi&h .as !ranted# as in this &ase# that .as the end

of the matter I (e&ame functus officio nd an) app'i&ation &ha''en!in! that order

sho"'d hae (een treated () another "d!e# ran their ar!"ment

I .as dismissie of this ar!"ment The ie. I tae of the matter is as

fo''o.s n e% parteapp'i&ation is ne&essari') a one-part) app'i&ation on one

ersion of fa&ts and# in an adersaria' s)stem of "sti&e# an e;&eption for its

s"mmar) and ar(itrar) nat"re It .o"'d &ompo"nd ar(itrariness to e;pe&t those

dire&t') affe&ted () the order !ien (ehind their (a& to !o &hasin! another

"d!e for the p"rpose of p"ttin! in theirs S"&h an interpretation .o"'d (e a !reat

he'p to inesti!ators ("t .hether it .o"'d he'p &itiAens# and .orse# the

esta('ishment of a fair "sti&e s)stem# I am not so s"re It is as !ood as sa)in!

that in o"r s)stem of 'a.# a"to&rati& attit"des of instit"tions sho"'d ride and pride

oer the demo&rati& ri!hts of &itiAens That .o"'d not (e m) idea of a fair tria'

The &on&ept of fair tria' in&'"des an important e'ement in toda)@s &ase-'a.:

that of e4"a'it) of arms Co"rt that stands (et.een the &itiAen and the State or

ma&hineries of the State sho"'d ens"re that the State or State instit"tions# on the

one hand# and the &itiAen# on the other# fa&e ea&h other on 'ee' terms Bhere


9/26

"di&ia' pro&ess is seen to !ie an "nfair adanta!e to the State or the State

instit"tions oer the &itiAen for .hose "sti&e the State# the State instit"tions or

their ma&hiner) are the sa&red repositor) "nder the Constit"tion# the Co"rts

.o"'d (e 'a"nderin! "sti&e not de'ierin! "sti&e

The prin&ip'e of e4"a'it) of arms as one of the e'ements of the (roader

&on&ept of fair tria' is .e'' i''"strated in a series of de&isions of the E"ropean

Co"rt of >"man Ri!hts# startin! .ith Alvis v Council &'(3 )C* +' The most

re&ent is that of ,omanicy v. lovaia &3 /*C0 "### .as a S'oaian

nationa' >e had (een dismissed from .or for a''e!ed indis&ip'ine >e .as not

!ien ade4"ate time to st"d) the fi'e prior to the hearin! of the &ase a!ainst him>e had 'itt'e possi(i'it) to &omment "pon the statements .hi&h .itnesses made

a!ainst him In addition# some eiden&e .as add"&ed .itho"t an) opport"nit)

!ien to him to re("t same >e had notified the Co"rt that he .o"'d not (e a('e

to attend for hea'th reasons None the 'ess# the Co"rt &onsidered him in defa"'t

and pro&eeded to &omp'ete the &ase in his a(sen&e

The Co"rt he'd that S'oaia had io'ated rti&'e 6 se&tion 1 .hi&h

enshrined the prin&ip'e of fair tria' in not a''o.in! e4"a'it) of arms This

prin&ip'e re4"ired that ea&h part) sho"'d (e afforded a reasona('e opport"nit) to

present his or her &ase "nder &onditions that did not p'a&e him or her at a

s"(stantia' disadanta!e vis-a vishis or her opponent

rti&'e 6# Se&tion 1 of the E"ropean Conention on >"man Ri!hts

!"arantees &itiAens of State *arties a fair tria' "r Constit"tion !"arantees o"r

&itiAens fair tria' e4"a'')

The &on&ept of a fair hearin! a'so imp'ies the ri!ht to adersaria'

pro&eedin!s The ri!ht to adersaria' pro&eedin!s in&'"de the ri!ht to (e present#


10/26

the ri!ht to no. .hat eiden&e one has to re("t# the ri!ht to &omment on

eiden&e and o(serations fi'ed# .ith a ie. to inf'"en&in! the Co"rt@s de&ision

The Co"rt@s ro'e for the p"rpose of as&ertainin! .hether the pro&eedin!s

are fair as a .ho'e is not a passie one The appearan&e of a fair administration

of "sti&e is as ita' as the fair administration of "sti&e itse'f

In the &ase# a&&ordin!')# hain! re!ard to the re4"irements of the prin&ip'e

of the e4"a'it) of arms and to the ro'e of appearan&es in determinin! .hether

the) had (een &omp'ied .ith# the Co"rt fo"nd that the pro&ed"re fo''o.ed did not

ena('e the app'i&ant to parti&ipate proper') in the pro&eedin!s and th"s depriedhim of a fair hearin! .ithin the meanin! of the Conention The "d!es of the

E"ropean Co"rt of "sti&e de&ided that there had (een a io'ation of rti&'e 6#

Se&tion 1 and a.arded EGR 1000 dama!es a!ainst S'oaia

The se&ond re&ent &ase .here the prin&ip'e of e4"a'it) of arms .as

app'ied is igon v 1oland &3 /*C0 "##".


11/26

The app'i&ant# Bi'to'd ,i!on# a *o'ish nationa'# .as detained on remand

d"rin! &rimina' pro&eedin!s (ro"!ht a!ainst him on s"spi&ion of a!!raated

fra"d# fa'sifi&ation of do&"ments and iss"in! (ad &he4"es The &ase .as 'od!ed

.ith the E"ropean Commission of >"man Ri!hts and transmitted to the Co"rt for

its hearin! The app'i&ant a''e!ed# in parti&"'ar# that the pro&eedin!s to reie.

this detention on remand had not (een adersaria' and that the e4"a'it) of the

parties in these pro&eedin!s had not (een o(sered sin&e neither he nor his

&o"nse' had (een a''o.ed to attend hearin!s (efore the rao. Co"rt of ppea'

&on&ernin! the pro'on!ation of his detention on remand# .hereas the prose&"tor

had (een a('e to do so The app'i&ant a'so &omp'ained that in the pro&eedin!s

&on&ernin! the reie. of the 'a.f"'ness of his detention# neither he nor his&o"nse' had (een !ranted ade4"ate a&&ess to the &ase-fi'e of the inesti!ation

>e re'ied on rti&'e 5# Se&tion H $ri!ht to 'i(ert) and se&"rit)% of the E"ropean

Conention on >"man Ri!hts

The Co"rt &ommented on the fa&t that e4"a'it) of arms (et.een the

parties ran thro"!ho"t the .ho'e pro&ess# from the (e!innin! of an inesti!ation#

thro"!h tria' sta!e and appea' sta!e ri!ht "p to the (itter end Th"s# a Co"rt

e;aminin! an appea' a!ainst detention m"st proide !"arantees of a "di&ia'

pro&ed"re The pro&eedin!s m"st (e adersaria' and m"st ade4"ate') ens"re

that there is e4"a'it) of arms (et.een the parties

The Co"rt he'd that there had (een a io'ation of rti&'e 5# Se&tion H of the

Conention () *o'and in not ens"rin! e4"a'it) of arms The prin&ip'e is of

perasie app'i&ation from inesti!ation to fina' de&ision The fo''o.in! remar of

the Co"rt is e'o4"ent:

It thus follows that2 in view of the dramatic impact of deprivation of

liberty on the fundamental rights of the person concerned2 proceedings

conducted under Article 2 ection + of the Convention should in principle


12/26

also meet2 to the largest e%tent possible under the circumstances of an

ongoing investigation2 the basic re4uirements of a fair trial2 such as the

right to adversarial procedure.$

ne ma) a'so refer to the &ase of 5eumeister v Austria6 &'7' & )/** '&

on the a(oe iss"e

The s&epti& ma) .onder ho. these de&isions of the E"ropean Co"rt of

"sti&e are re'eant to o"r ,a"ritian 'a. Be do not hae a re!iona' fri&an

Co"rt of "sti&e for >"man Ri!hts Be do not hae a pan-Common.ea'th Co"rt

.here h"man ri!hts iss"es ma) (e taen to oersee ho. o"r demo&ra&) "nderthe R"'e of a. .ors Indeed# at &ertain times# .e .ish .e had nd .e ma)

.ish to hope that .e sha'' >o.eer# .ith it or .itho"t it# h"man ri!hts standards

of 'a. are for "niersa' app'i&ation and sho"'d not (e (edei''ed () &onentiona'

ideas on "risdi&tiona' soerei!nt) The R"'e of a. is not a paro&hia' ("t a

"niersa' &on&ept s has (een stated in the an!a'ore *rin&ip'es en"n&iated in

the "di&ia' Co''o4"i"m $1?88% of Common.ea'th "d!es on the omesti&

pp'i&ation of >"man Ri!hts Norms:

Fundamental human rights and freedoms are inherent in all

humanind and find e%pression in constitutions and legal systems

throughout the world and in the international human rights instruments.$

s re!ards the ro'e of Co"rts in the app'i&ation of "niersa' h"man ri!hts

standards# the an!a'ore *rin&ip'es hae this to sa):

8here is an impressive body of 9urisprudence2 both

international and national2 concerning the interpretation of particular

human rights and freedoms and their application. 8his body of

9urisprudence is of practical value to 9udges and lawyers generally.$


13/26

In m) o.n ie.# pro&ed"re is desi!ned to assist s"(stan&e Bhere

pro&ed"re is "sed as a te&hni&a'it) to den) s"(stan&e# the first i&tim (e&omes

"sti&e itse'f

The &onstit"tiona' ri!hts of &itiAens# reprod"&ed in ('a& and .hite oer 35

)ears a!o# sho"'d not appear to the &itiAens to hae (een .rit on .ater@ ("t

in&"'&ated in the a&t"a' pra&ti&e of instit"tions and offi&ia's and trans'ated in the

eer)da) 'iin! of the &itiAens Bhere Co"rts are seiAed of these fai'"res# Co"rts

sho"'d not effe&t# as a r"'e# hono"ra('e e;its () p'eadin! "risdi&tiona'

in&ompeten&e

earned Co"nse' for (oth pp'i&ants Nos 1 and 2 a'so s"(mitted that#

.hateer ie. ma) (e taen of the tta&hment rder and the prin&ip'e of

functus officio#@ the fa&t remains that "nder se&tion 57 $2%# pro&ed"re for a

reo&ation order is spe&ifi&a'') enisa!ed "nder the &t (efore a "d!e in

Cham(ers so that the present app'i&ations from the &ompanies and persons are

'e!a'') in order# as far as the) .ere &on&erned

Se&tion H5 $2% proides:

ub9ect to subsection :3;2 an attachment order shall2 unless

revoed by a


14/26

f the man) iss"es &anassed# there .ere 3 &riti&a' eno"!h to de&ide the

&ase one .a) or the other: app'i&a(i'it) of the +inan&ia' Inte''i!en&e and nti-

,one) a"nderin! &t 2002 $+I,% to the &ase9 'a& of eiden&e to

s"(stantiate aerments and the s&ope of se&tion 56 of *C I sha'' dea' .ith it

seriatim

CRIMINA/ /A- IS NOT RETROACTIVE

fter re&eiin! *residentia' assent# *C and +I, .ere pro&'aimed

on the 10th"ne 2002 ,r *"rsem s"(mitted that the a&ts &omp'ained () ICC

.ith respe&t to his &'ient too p'a&e on or a(o"t 27 ,a) 2002 To this# ,rs,anna# Co"nse' for ICC responded that mone) 'a"nderin! is a &ontin"o"s

offen&e so that it did not matter .hether the) too p'a&e (efore so 'on! as the

state of affairs hae remained the same ti'' after the 10 thof "ne I .o"'d tend to

a!ree .ith ,rs ,anna on the &ontin"o"s nat"re of an offen&e of mone)-

'a"nderin! >o.eer# the fa&t remains that the state of affairs are no 'on!er the

same .ith respe&t to app'i&ant No 1 in that he had e;ited the s&ene &omp'ete')

() ? Septem(er 2000 .hen he had resi!ned from a'' &ompanies .hi&h .ere not

State-o.ned If the ICC taes the ie. in its ffidait# as it does# that he is

"nder inesti!ation for a mone) 'a"nderin! offen&e "nder +I,# then +I,

is p'ain') inapp'i&a('e to this pp'i&ant s ri!ht') pointed o"t () ,r *"rsem#

*C does proide for transitiona' app'i&ations of offen&es "nder the repea'ed

&ts: the E&onomi& Crime and nti ,one) a"nderin! &t and se&tions 125-

133 of the Crimina' Code >o.eer# it is on') the Commissioner of *o'i&e .ho

has (een empo.ered to &ommen&e an) inesti!ation# in respe&t of an offen&e

&ommitted or a''e!ed to (e &ommitted a!ainst the repea'ed ena&tments as if

*C had not &ome into operation

THE SCOPE OF SECTION 59 OF POCA


15/26

,rs ,anna# for ICC# a'so s"(mitted that se&tion 56 of *C (ein! an

entire') ne. pro&ed"re in o"r 'a. re'ates to the se&"rin! of assets .hi&h ma) (e

pro&eeds of &orr"pt pra&ti&es Its prin&ipa' p"rpose is to preent a'"a('e

eiden&e or assets "nder inesti!ation from disappearin! in thin air () the time

the inesti!ators &'ose in In other .ords# it is a propert) preseration dei&e and

a &itiAen &o''a(oration dei&e

,r D'oer has no diffi&"'t) .ith this interpretation ("t he adds that in this

&ase ICC is mis"sin! se&tion 56 >e s"(mitted that se&tion 56 maes a &'ear

distin&tion (et.een s"spe&ts and !arnishees The se&tion reads:

45. Application for attachment order

$1% 5otwithstanding any other enactment2 where a


16/26

:c; prohibit the person from transferring2 pledging

or otherwise disposing of any money or other

property so attached e%cept in such manner as may

be specified in the order.

>is s"(mission is that as far as he is &on&erned his &'ient is a !arnishee

and not a s"spe&t

ne does not need spe&ia' effort to "nderstand se&tion 56 In e'ementar)

'a.# it means ICC needs to satisf) a "d!e in Cham(ers of 2 fa&ts:

$a% that it has reasona('e !ro"nd to s"spe&t9

$(% that an offen&e "nder either +I, or *C has (een

&ommitted

n those !ro"nds# it ma) see an tta&hment rder to atta&h propert)

Bhose propert)J The ans.er is as &'ear as: a'' mone) and other p'+p'%:,

+' +;!$ +'


17/26

ho'ders of mone)s and propert) a''e!ed') mishand'ed# ICC has mis&onstr"ed

its po.ers "nder the 'a.

fter hearin! the parties fo''o.in! the ori!ina' e% parte order made# I am

satisfied that the app'i&ation .as made on the .ron! premises Se&tion 56 is not

to (e "sed for s"spe&ts ("t for ho'ders in d"e &o"rse It is a &itiAen &o''a(oratie

dei&e not a s"spe&t &oer&ie too'

REASONAB/E *ROUND TO SUSPECT

+o''o.in! m) de&ision re!ardin! the s&ope of se&tion 56 a(oe#there is no stri&t need for me to dea' .ith the ne;t iss"e# that is# the 'a.@s

re4"irement of reasona('e s"spi&ion a!ainst the &ompanies and persons that

hae (een &onsidered to (e s"spe&ts for their propert) to (e atta&hed

>o.eer# ICC made reasona('e s"spi&ion on the &ompanies and

persons its 'i!ne de mire# and# it .o"'d (e an omission on m) part not to !ie

this aspe&t some &onsideration

Bhat is reasona('e s"spi&ion in 'a.J It is the &riterion the app'i&ation of

.hi&h has the effe&t of instant') &"rtai'in! some of the &r"&ia' f"ndamenta'

freedoms and prote&tions of the &itiAen +rom the moment a simp'e *o'i&e ffi&er

reasona(') s"spe&ts that a &itiAen has &ommitted an offen&e# the &itiAen 'oses

his &onstit"tiona' prote&tions so to spea

e&a"se of a'' the riss and peri's it &arries for the &itiAen# the 'e!a' term is

s"(e&ted to some ne&essar) 'e!a' and "di&ia' 4"a'ifi&ations e!a'')# the

s"spi&ion sho"'d (e reasona('e If there is no reasona(i'it) in the s"spi&ion# the

effe&t .o"'d (e drasti& for a demo&ra&) ne offi&er@s mere s"spi&ion &an set the


18/26

.ho'e *o'i&e +or&e and State apparat"s r"nnin! and mae a mo&er) of the

&itiAen@s freedoms and 'i(erties ne sin!'e offi&er@s s"spi&ion .o"'d mae a

differen&e (et.een a di&tatorship and a demo&ra&) a.# a&&ordin!')# sees to

!"ide the ffi&er in his appre&iation of .hen and ho. to e;er&ise his potentia'')

di&tatoria' po.ers This it does () imposin! &ertain &onditions +irst# the

s"spi&ion sho"'d (e reasona('e: ,ing v @ardner :&'7'; 7& Cr. App. *. &3> 1rince

&'?&B Crim. !. *. (3?.Se&ond reasona(i'it) sho"'d (e !a"!ed not from the

persona' point of ie. of an offi&er or his s"(e&tie standard It sho"'d (e

appre&iated from the o(e&tie standard# the point of ie. of a dispassionate

()stander: Inland *evenue Commissioners v *ossminster !td &'?#B A.C. '"

+ina'')# and important')# the s"spi&ion sho"'d (e (ased on fa&ts: ,ing v @ardner:supra;> 1rince :supra;> are v atthew February &&2 &'?&2 &'7? . 5o. &7?#

:!e%is; The fa&ts re'ied on sho"'d (e s"&h as are &onsistent .ith the imp'i&ation

of the s"spe&t in the &rime: 1edro v 0iss &'?&B " All )* '2 0.C.> &'?&B Crim.

!.*. "3( It sho"'d not (e e4"io&a' .ith his imp'i&ation and his non imp'i&ation

n') then .i'' an ffi&er@s e;er&ise of po.ers on reasona('e s"spi&ion (e

demo&rati& and not a"to&rati& and the po.er "ser (e said to (e main! a

differen&e (et.een demo&ra&) and di&tatorship

Bhat has happened in this &aseJ ICC has imp"ted dishonest moties on

the app'i&ants and treated them as s"spe&ts Bhen its t"rn &ame to sho. ()

some affidait on .hat fa&ts the) are (asin! themse'es to entertain the

s"spi&ion# the) repeat that their s"spi&ion is reasona('e# the) !ie some

information and den) "s the rest

+or app'i&ant No 1: the ans.er is that app'i&ant has re&eied pro&eeds of

the ,a"riti"s Commer&ia' an representin! s"(stantia' s"ms of mone)

&&ordin! to the inesti!ation# there is eiden&e that one of the s"spe&ts in the

&ase .as on or a(o"t 10 +e(r"ar) 2003 in the offi&e of pp'i&ant for the p"rpose


19/26

of draftin! a 'etter in re'ation to a s"m of Rs 25 m on (eha'f of the N*+ at the

,C

The &o"nter-affidait a'so states that ,r Ramde.ar .as persona'') tain!

possession of the offi&e &he4"es iss"ed () ,C# that after pri' 2002# he

persona'') too possession of offi&e &he4"es dra.n to the order of >SC and

State an of ,a"riti"s and presented to the re'eant offi&ers at the said (ans

and effe&ted s"(se4"ent on.ard transfer to other a&&o"nts in other (ans

in&'"din! oerseas (ans

The fa&ts ma) aro"se s"spi&ion "t the 'a. re4"ires reasona('es"spi&ion Can it (e reasona(') inferred from these fa&ts# .itho"t more# to an

o(e&tie o(serer that ,r Ramde.ar is a s"spe&t in the e)es of the 'a.

&&o"nt sho"'d (e taen of t.o important fa&ts The first is that ,r Ramde.ar is

an ttorne) at 'a. and# 'ie man) ttorne)s# he administers the f"nds of man)

&'ients >e has said so in his affidait The se&ond is that ICC has sti'' not

o(tained ,r Ramde.ar@s ersion on these transa&tions as )et Can he or an)

one for that matter reasona(') (e&ome a s"spe&t on ha'f-tr"thJ s ri!ht') pointed

o"t () 'earned Co"nse' for ,r Ramde.ar# if that is reasona('e s"spi&ion in 'a.

then eer) transa&tion in a (an or a&tiit) in the Cham(ers of an ttorne) or an)

professiona' for that matter (e&omes reasona('e s"spi&ion in 'a. and eer)one

is 'ia('e to (e arrested

+or pp'i&ant No 3# ICC@s ans.er is one Teeren ppasam) is one of the

ire&tors of the pp'i&ant Compan) Inesti!ation reea's that Teeren ppasam)

has (een ino'ed in mone) 'a"nderin! and that this app'i&ant has (enefited from

the pro&eeds of the &rime ICC a'so hides (ehind the &onfidentia'it) of the

en4"ir) and .o"'d not .ant to dis&'ose more


20/26

s for pp'i&ant No H# the ans.er .hi&h ICC !ies is more or 'ess the

same as a(oe Teeren ppasam) is one of the ire&tors and inesti!ation

reea's that Teeren ppasam) has (een ino'ed in mone) 'a"nderin! There is

reasona('e s"spi&ion that this app'i&ant has (enefited from the pro&eeds of the

&rime ICC# on&e a!ain# .o"'d .ant to p'ead &onfidentia'it) of the en4"ir) and

.o"'d not .ant to dis&'ose more

The ie. I tae of the matter is as fo''o.s: ICC ma) (e of opinion that

the fa&ts a''e!ed in its e)es are reasona('e s"spi&ions >o.eer# the e)es of

ICC are not the 'a.s of the &o"ntr) It is the e)es of an o(e&tie ()stander In

the a(sen&e of more detai's from .hi&h the &rimina' intent of the pp'i&ants ma)(e reasona(') inferred# one is tempted to sa) that ICC is at the sta!e on') on a

fishin! e;pedition

ICC is indeed empo.ered to "ndertae s"&h an e;&"rsion "nder se&tion

56 Bhat it has no po.er to do is to "se se&tion 56 as a &oer&ie meas"re at the

e;pense of &itiAen@s f"ndamenta' freedoms and 'i(erties To do as it has done#

ICC# (e it noted# has "sed hi!h so"ndin! 'e!a' &'i&hKs in its affidait: pro&eeds

of &rime# !iin! instr"&tions# fra"d"'ent misappropriation In a demo&rati&

s)stem of "sti&e# deried from 'on! tradition and an e;p'i&it Constit"tion .hi&h in

t"rn (oasts of a i'' of Ri!hts .hi&h is more or 'ess a te;t"a' reprod"&tion of the

E"ropean Conention of >"man Ri!hts# ICC@s approa&h ma) 'oo fri!htenin!

e!a' &'i&hKs are no s"(stit"te for eiden&e an) more than s"spi&ion is s"(stit"te

for eiden&e

The meanin! of the term reasona('e s"spi&ion has (een disti''ed from

&ase-'a. and no. reprod"&ed as se&tion 16 of nne; of the Code of *ra&ti&e

for the E;er&ise of *o'i&e ffi&ers: see Castorina v Chief Constable of urrey

&'?? 5! 0allison v Caffery :&'(; & DE 3+?2 37& and


21/26

iltshire v Earrett :&'((; & DE 3&"2 3""> urphy v %ford :& February &'??2

unreported;.

Reasona('e s"spi&ion m"st ne&essari') (e !ro"nded on fa&ts:

*easonable suspicion2 in contrast to mere suspicion2 must be

founded on fact. 8here must be some concrete basis for the officerGs

belief2 related to the individual person concerned2 which can be

considered and evaluated by an ob9ective third person.$

Reasona('e s"spi&ion m"st ne&essari') (e distin!"ished frommere s"spi&ion

ere suspicion2 in contrast2 is a hunch or instinct which cannot be

e%plained or 9ustified to an ob9ective observer.$

Reasona('e s"spi&ion is no instin&t# a''o.s no !"ess# no si;th

sense It is s&ientifi& It has to find s"pport on fa&ts# not e4"io&a' fa&ts ("t

fa&ts &onsistent .ith !"i't '' that an inesti!ator) a"thorit) ma) do .ith its

h"n&hes is eep the person "nder o(seration ("t it &annot a&t on it

An officer who had a hunch or instinct might well be 9ustified in

eeping the person under observation but additional grounds would be

needed to bring suspicion to the level of reasonable suspicion.$

Se&tion 16 of the En!'ish *o'i&e < Crimina' Eiden&e &t 1?8H

maes it amp') &'ear as to ho. inesti!ator) offi&ers sho"'d (e !"ided in

app')in! the prin&ip'e of reasona('e s"spi&ion in their da)-to-da) pra&ti&e

It is as fo''o.s:


22/26

&.(. hether reasonable grounds for suspicion e%ist will

depend on the circumstances in each case2 but there must be

some ob9ective basis for it.$

+or instan&e# in the &ase of a motorin! offen&e# the fa&t that a ehi&'e@s

&hassis n"m(er differs from the one stated in its papers ma) (e reasona('e

s"spi&ion >o.eer# resistan&e to !ie name and address on (ein! stopped ()

*o'i&e .o"'d not aro"se reasona('e s"spi&ion: are v attew :supra;.ie.ise#

in an en4"ir) for sto'en propert)#

:A;n officer will need to consider the nature of the articlesuspected of being carried in the conte%t of other factors such as the time

and the place2 and the behaviour of the person concerned or those with

him. *easonable suspicion may e%ist2 for e%ample2 where information

has been received such as a description of an article being carried or of a

suspected offender> a person is seen acting covertly or warily or

attempting to hide something> or a person is carrying a certain type of

article at an unusual time or in a place where a number of burglaries or

thefts are nown to have taen place recently.$

n) &oer&ie de&ision on reasona('e s"spi&ion m"st (e (ased on a'' the

fa&ts .hi&h (ear on the 'ie'ihood that an arti&'e of a &ertain ind .i'' (e fo"nd

Conerse')# reasona('e !ro"nds for s"spi&ion do not e;ist .here ph)si&a'# so&ia'#

ps)&ho'o!i&a' or other pre"di&es &ome into p'a) Th"s#

*easonable suspicion can never be supported on the basis of

personal factors alone. For e%ample2 a personGs colour2 age2 hairstyle or

manner of dress2 or the fact that he is nown to have a previous

conviction for possession of an unlawful article2 cannot be used alone or

in combination with each other as the sole basis on which to search that


23/26

person. 5or may it be founded on the basis of stereotyped images of

certain persons or groups as more liely to be committing offences.$

+a&ts ma) point "ne4"io&a'') to the ie. taen () the po'i&e or

e4"io&a'') to that ie. Bhere the) point "ne4"io&a'')# the s"spi&ion is

reasona('e Bhere the) are e4"io&a'# no &oer&ie a&tion ma) (e taen () the

*o'i&e "nti' the fa&ts (e&ome "ne4"io&a' +or e;amp'e# in are v atthew

:supra;2 the Co"rt o(sered that an initial refusal of name and address was

consistent at least as much with that of a wrong-headed ill-informed motorist as

with that of a man guilty of theft.$In s"&h &ases# it a&&ords .ith !ood sense for

the *o'i&e to p'a&e the person in 4"estion "nder o(seration rather than tae&oer&ie a&tion on do"(tf"' s"spi&ion

T.o other aspe&ts re4"ire m) &omments: the p'ea of ICC that more to

dis&'ose .o"'d pre"di&e its in4"ir) In Christie v !eachinsy &'+7B & All )* (7#

the 'eadin! &ase on po'i&e po.ers# =is&o"nt Simon &ommented that if a

po'i&eman arrests on reasona('e s"spi&ion he is not entit'ed to eep the reason

to himse'f The other aspe&t of the aerment of ICC is the s"perimposition of

reasona('e s"spi&ion The aerment is that ICC has reasona('e !ro"nd to

s"spe&t that the L &ompanies and persons L had reasona('e !ro"nds for

s"spe&tin! that L the) .ere hand'in! mone) from tainted so"r&e This ass"mes

that anti-&orr"ption 'a.s and anti-mone) 'a"nderin! 'a.s are &rimes of stri&t

'ia(i'it) s s"&h# it does not matter .hether the &ompanies and persons had or

did not hae the re4"ired &rimina' intent n s"&h an interpretation# it .o"'d

s"ffi&e to imp"te the mens rea$menta' state% of a reasona('e man "pon a'' these

&ompanies and persons and p"t them (ehind (ars The 'a. .o"'d not a''o. an)

&onsideration as to .hether the) had the s"(e&tie mens reaor not The 'east

said a(o"t s"&h an interpretation the (est


24/26

est I sha'' (e ta;ed of an "n"stified preferen&e for !iin! more .ei!ht to

h"man ri!hts iss"es than to anti-&orr"ption iss"es# 'et me dra. from re&o!niAed

anti-&orr"ption e;perts In the So"r&e oo 2000# Confrontin! Corr"ption: The

E'ements of a Nationa' Inte!rit) S)stem# Transparen&) Internationa' proposes

ei!ht !enera' prin&ip'es .hi&h sho"'d !oern a nationa' strate!) a!ainst

&orr"ption mon! those# it is e'o4"ent that the first - the er) first - speas of a

&orr"ption 'a. "nder the r"'e of 'a.# in &onsonan&e .ith h"man ri!hts

!"arantees

&. !aws against corruption should comply with international

human rights standards and afford a fair trial to those accused. It iscrucial that criminal laws against corruption respect human rights

guarantees2 under a Constitutional Eill of *ights or an international code2

to ensure specific procedures are not struc down by the courts as being

unconstitutional.H

No. for m) o.n ie.s# &orr"ption is () and 'ar!e the ri!hts of &apita'

Ri!hts of &apita' &annot ride ro"!h-shod on ri!hts of h"manind That the

&o"ntr) has to improe its nationa' and internationa' ima!e in the &orr"ption

per&eption inde;# of that there &an (e no do"(t >o.eer# it sho"'d not in the

pro&ess impair its nationa' and internationa' ima!e on the h"man ri!hts

per&eption inde; The t.o inde;es are not m"t"a'') e;&'"sie

I (e'iee that a pra&ti&e of a 'a. a!ainst &orr"ption that pa)s s&ant re!ard

to >"man Ri!ht standards is as !"i't) of &orr"pt pra&ti&e as the &orr"pt pra&ti&e

the 'a. sees to stamp o"t ,ethods that are per&eied to (e hi!h-handed#

io'atie of (asi& prin&ip'es of fairness and (rea&h of f"ndamenta' freedoms and

'i(erties in a so&iet) so een to improe on them ma) .e'' (e &o"nter-prod"&tie

The &omp'ete pro&ess sho"'d e;"de fairness# from the sta!e of den"n&iation#

thro"!h inesti!ation sta!e ri!ht "p to the sta!e of tria'# erdi&t and senten&e#


25/26

.here senten&e is prono"n&ed This is no s"!!estion that ICC is oersteppin!

*C is a ne. 'a. It is (o"nd to !o thro"!h a teethin! period "t as the Report

of Transparen&) Internationa' remars# it is not ri!ht that from the moment an

operation starts# eer)(od) &on&erned is re!arded and treated as an enem)

ICC &an i''-afford an a'' ro"nd &oer&ie strate!) not 4"ite &onsonant .ith the

phi'osoph) of the &t# .hi&h sees the &ooperation and &o''a(oration of a''

&on&erned s Transparen&) Internationa' o(seres: A single-minded focus on

corruption prevention can also have a negative impact on personal freedoms and

fundamental human rights6$$see the S"mmar) of TI So"r&e oo# i(id%

+or a'' the reasons a(oe# I reoe the order a!ainst the first fo"r

app'i&ants .hi&h I had made on the 21st

of +e(r"ar) 2003 It is open to ICC to"se se&tion 56 as a &o''a(oratie instead of &oer&ie meas"re

In the 'i!ht of the a(oe order# the iss"e of Interention () pp'i&ant

,a"riti"s Commer&ia' an td does not arise

+or pp'i&ant in the 1st &ase

,r R *"rsem# of &o"nse'

,r R "&to.ansin!# ttorne)

+or pp'i&ant in the 2nd &ase

,r D D'oer# of Co"nse'

,r Se.ra# ttorne)

+or pp'i&ant in the 3rd < Hth &ases,r Toor("th# of Co"nse'

,rs R rimoh"n# ttorne)

+or pp'i&ant in 5 th &ase

,r > "a'# of Co"nse'

,r D N! Bon! >in!# of ttorne)

+or pp'i&ant in the 6th &ase

,r * Spei''e# of Co"nse'

,r T oeni!# ttorne)


26/26

+or Respondent in a'' &ases

,rs D ,anna# ! Chief e!a' diser#

,rs + ,oo'na# *rin&ipa' State ttorne)

Documents

MANRAJ D D & ORS v ICAC.pdf