Supreme Court to decide Rahman's cocaine conviction appeal

The Supreme Court will decide whether Joshua Rahman remains acquitted or whether his conviction for possessing 39.5 kilograms of cocaine should be restored.

Rahman successfully appealed his conviction in February when the Court of Appeal quashed it and ordered a retrial.

The State has appealed that ruling, asking the Supreme Court to reinstate the conviction. Rahman has filed a cross-appeal, arguing that a retrial would be contrary to the interests of justice.

The matter was heard yesterday by a three-member Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice and President of the Supreme Court Salesi Temo, Justice Anthony Gates and Justice William Young.

State’s case

Acting director of Public Prosecutions Nancy Tikoisuva submitted that the Court of Appeal misinterpreted the law on possession and failed to properly assess evidence establishing both the physical and mental elements of possession beyond reasonable doubt.

Ms Tikoisuva argued the appellate judges wrongly interpreted the statutory presumptions under the Illicit Drugs Control Act and incorrectly concluded there had been a miscarriage of justice.

Ms Tikoisuva said the Court of Appeal should have applied the proviso, which allowed a conviction to stand where no substantial miscarriage of justice occurred.

Defence

Senior lawyer Devanesh Sharma argued the prosecution case contained significant gaps that created reasonable doubt and could not be remedied by a second trial.

Mr Sharma described the police investigation as “extremely lazy police work”.

He said although cocaine was found inside the house, no DNA analysis, fingerprint evidence or footprint evidence was produced to link Rahman to the drugs.

Mr Sharma argued the State may have established the presence of the drugs but failed to prove Rahman had knowledge of, or control over, them.

He said those shortcomings in the investigation created reasonable doubt.

Mr Sharma told the court Rahman had spent seven years in prison and asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the State’s appeal, quash the retrial and allow his client to return home to Canada.

The Supreme Court reserved its decision and will deliver its ruling on a date to be announced.