[Photo: File]

The Supreme Court has allowed the State’s appeal to reinstate the High Court’s conviction and sentence involving Fiji-Canadian national Joshua Rahman at the Veiuto Court Complex in Suva this morning

This is after the Court of Appeal had quashed Joshua Rahman’s conviction and sentence for one count of unlawful possession of illicit drugs.

Joshua Rahman was previously convicted and sentenced to 23 years’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 14 years, for the unlawful possession of 39.5 kilograms of cocaine.

He then appealed his conviction and sentence.

The Court of Appeal subsequently quashed the conviction and sentence and ordered a retrial.

Following the Court of Appeal’s decision, the State filed a petition of appeal to have the Court of Appeal’s decision set aside and the High Court’s earlier decision
reinstated.

Rahman had also filed a cross-appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision for a retrial following the quashing of his conviction and sentence.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard submissions from both parties.

The central issue concerned the interpretation of section 32 of the Illicit Drugs Control Act, which provides for a presumption of possession where illicit drugs are found on premises under an accused’s control.

The Supreme Court confirmed that the provision imposes an evidential burden, rather than a legal burden, on the accused.

The accused is required only to raise evidence sufficient to create a reasonable doubt as to possession.

Although the trial judge initially referred to the burden as a legal burden, the Supreme Court found that, in the final analysis, the correct standard was applied and the prosecution was required to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

The Court was satisfied that the conviction was supported by the evidence and that the error did not affect the outcome.

The Supreme Court granted special leave to both parties, dismissed the Defence petition and allowed the State’s petition.

The Supreme Court then quashed the Court of Appeal’s decision, and restored the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court.