State of New South Wales v Kiskonen (Preliminary) [2021] NSWSC 915

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Kiskonen (Preliminary) [2021] NSWSC 915 Hearing dates: 21 July 2021 Date of orders: 27 July 2021 Decision date: 27 July 2021 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Lonergan J Decision: (1) Amended summons dismissed. (2) Plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs. Catchwords: HIGH RISK TERRORISM OFFENDERS – preliminary hearing - whether interim supervision order should be made – whether matters alleged would if proved justify an ESO – whether offender poses an unacceptable risk of committing a serious terrorism offence – application refused Legislation Cited: Criminal Code (Cth) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW) Cases Cited: Minister for Home Affairs v Benbrika (2021) 388 ALR 1; [2021] HCA 4 State of NSW v Fayad (Preliminary) [2020] NSWSC 1681 Category: Principal judgment Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Juha Kiskonen (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: J Emmett SC / T Epstein (Plaintiff) M Johnston SC / E S Kerkyasharian / S J Young (Defendant) Solicitors: Crown Solicitor's Office (NSW) (Plaintiff) Ryan Payten Le (Defendant) File Number(s): 2021/00201054 Publication restriction: Nil

Choose an item.

Judgment 1. The plaintiff, the State of New South Wales, brings proceedings against Juha Kiskonen, the defendant, pursuant to the Terrorism (High Risk Offenders) Act 2017 (NSW) ("the Act"), for an Interim Supervision Order ("ISO") under s 27 of the Act for 28 days, with a view to obtaining an Extended Supervision Order ("ESO") for three years on specific conditions. Ancillary orders are sought for the appointment of two psychiatrists or psychologists under s 24(1) of the Act and that the defendant be directed to comply with a series of conditions (55 in number), during the period of the ISO. 2. The defendant opposes the imposition of an ISO or ESO. 3. The Summons seeking these orders was dated 12 July 2021 and was filed on 13 July 2021. An Amended Summons was filed in Court with leave on 21 July 2021.The defendant is due for release at midnight on 29 July 2021. 4. Due to the very late commencement of the proceedings and the very late notice to the defendant, he has had to compress both his time to give instructions to his legal representatives and their time to prepare his defence of this application. The quality of the written submissions provided by counsel for the defendant, and the relevance of the material provided by the defendant for me to consider, is commendable given the very short timeframe within which this has had to be prepared.