Supreme court can have ‘no confidence’ crown is ready for trial, says NSW judge forced to vacate murder trial of alleged Brothers for Life member Mohammed Hamzy

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

A long-standing NSW judge has hit out at “incompetence and inefficiency” within the office of the director of public prosecutions (DPP), saying the supreme court can have “no confidence whatsoever” when the crown says it is ready for trial.



Acting justice Robert Shallcross Hulme made the comments on Tuesday after he was forced to vacate the murder trial of alleged Brothers for Life member Mohammed Hamzy.

“I have now been or acted as a judge of this court for over 20 years and I never cease to be surprised at the extent of the incompetence or the inefficiency within the office of the director of public prosecutions,” he said in the judgment.



Hamzy, who is charged with a number of offences, including murder, was arrested in November 2013 and was due to face trial next month.



When the matter came before the court on numerous occasions earlier this year, Hulme said his colleague justice Peter Johnson had been told there were no pre-trial issues.



But then, in the past two weeks, the crown served further statements.



“One of those statements was calculated, perhaps inevitably, to embarrass the solicitor for Mr Hamzy who, in consequence, has taken the view that he can no longer appear.



“Fresh solicitors have been engaged, but it is claimed that the matter cannot be ready to proceed next Monday.”



It now seems clear, said Hulme, that Hamzy will not be able to face trial until mid-February at the earliest, by which time he would have been in remand for more than two years.



“It is, in my view, a disgrace to the criminal justice system that people are incarcerated for that length of time prior to their trial,” Hulme stated.



While it was “notorious” that NSW courts were unable to provide accused people with “reasonably expeditious trials” because of work pressures, in Hamzy’s case it was clear those at the DPP involved in the trial were “not aware of a deal of information which is clearly relevant and which should have been disclosed long ago”, he said.



“It seems to me clear that the arraignment judge in the future can have no confidence whatsoever in any statements by the crown that a case is ready for trial.



“Such statements might be correct, but if so it will be purely a matter of chance.”



Hamzy’s matter has been stood over to the arraignment list on 2 October.



The DPP has been asked for comment.