R v Musleh [2018] NSWSC 1222

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Musleh [2018] NSWSC 1222 Hearing dates: 20 June 2018 Date of orders: 20 June 2018 Decision date: 20 June 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Adamson J Decision: see paragraph [14] Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – non-publication order to protect identity of informant and associated information – order made for closure of the court for informant's evidence and other disclosures of sensitive information – orders not opposed – orders made as sought Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina Muhammad Abdul-Karim Musleh Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police Representation: Counsel: D G Staehil SC (Crown) G Scragg (Accused) P Melican (Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police) (Applicant)

Solicitors: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecution (Crown) Birchgrove Legal (Accused) Australian Government Solicitor (Applicant) File Number(s): 2016/341400

Judgment: EX TEMPORE

Introduction 1. By notice of motion filed in court on 20 June 2018 the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (the Commissioner) seeks orders pursuant to the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) (the Act). Other orders are sought which include an order that the court be closed for particular aspects of the evidence, opening and submissions. The application is supported by a confidential affidavit sworn on 1 June 2018 by Leanne Close who is a Deputy Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (AFP). In April 2018 Ms Close was appointed to the position of Deputy Commissioner National Security. 2. I was provided with a copy of Ms Close's affidavit, the notice of motion and written submissions made on behalf of the Commissioner in advance of the hearing of the notice of motion. In order to protect the name of the informant from disclosure, I propose, at the conclusion of the delivery of these reasons, to return copies of those documents to Mr Melican, who appears on behalf of the Commissioner, for safe-keeping by the Australian Government Solicitor. I note that Mr Scragg, who appears on behalf of the accused Muhammed Musleh, has indicated that his client does not oppose the orders sought in the notice of motion. The Crown has also indicated that it does not oppose the orders sought in the notice of motion.