325 charges thrown out

"That amount of charges brought must be one for the Guinness Book of Records," Maharaj told Judge Clare Henry-Watson in a judicial review case brought against the Attorney General, the DPP, the Comptroller of Customs, and the Magistrate who wanted to proceed with the charges although the High Court action was pending.

Maharaj, leading Gerald Burton and Julien Prevost, appeared for Henry Liu, Feng Huang and Shine Union Trading Company Limited, while well-known Caribbean lawyer Anthony Astaphans SC and Heather Felix-Evans represented the government.

Judge Henry-Watson, however, ruled that the government proceed with three conspiracy charges against the plaintiffs. Maharaj has since indicated that he intends to appeal against that decision. The court also ordered that the government pay the costs of the judicial review case.

Liu and Huang acquired economic citizenship in Dominica in 1995 and incorporated their company the following year. They set up their business and stored goods in a bonded warehouse on the island.

In August 1999, the Customs and Excise department claimed it received certain information and began investigations against the plaintiffs. One month later, customs officials executed search warrants on the plaintiffs and carried away invoices and documents.Based on their investigations, the comptroller believed that false entries were presented by the plaintiffs and that goods had been removed from the warehouse without payment of customs duties.

The comptroller stated that after some discussions, the plaintiffs agreed to compound the offences and pay a penalty of EC $1,723,024 with an initial payment of EC $1,023,024 and 18 monthly instalments of EC $40,000.

However, the plaintiffs never paid the money. The comptroller concluded that Customs officer Gene Lawrence, was involved in the preparations of most of the documents.

By a letter dated December 31, 1999, the comptroller gave the assurance that if Lawrence resigned from the public service, no action would be taken against him. Lawrence tendered his resignation the same day.

In 2000, 325 charges were laid against the plaintiffs. About 18 months later, the government brought an additional three charges of conspiracy against Lui, Huang and Lawrence.

In February 2003, the plaintiffs filed a constitutional motion alleging a breach of their constitutional right to a fair trial within a reasonable time and seeking dismissal of all the charges.

Magistrate Ossie Lewis denied an application for the criminal charges to be put on hold pending the determination of the constitutional motion.

In July 2004, an application for judicial review was filed and the constitutional motion was withdrawn.

In her judgment, Henry-Watson found that the conduct of the prosecution was oppressive and amounted to an abuse of the process of the court. She found that the DPP could have consolidated the charges into a far smaller number of charges.

"While it is possible technically to draft 325 substantial charges, fairness demanded that the matters be brought forward in a manageable and just manner," Henry-Watson said.

Counsel for the Government suggested that they consolidate the cases instead of stopping them altogether. Maharaj produced the Privy Council judgment in the Jamaat Al Muslimeen amnesty appeal to show it would be an abuse of process to proceed with the charges.

The judge agreed and ordered that the 325 charges be stopped and not proceeded with. She said that the promise made by the comptroller not to charge Gene Lawrence with any offence once he resigned from the public service was binding and must stand. She stopped the prosecution against Lawrence.

But the judge ordered that the conspiracy case be proceeded with, against Liu and Huang and that the preliminary inquiry be completed by March 31, 2006.