Pubdate: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 Source: New Zealand Herald (New Zealand) Copyright: 2000 New Zealand Herald Contact: PO Box 32, Auckland, New Zealand Fax: (09) 373-6421 Website: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/ Forum: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/forums/ Author: Josie Clarke BILLIONAIRE CASE JOLT FOR COURTS A milestone High Court ruling yesterday vindicated the Herald's campaign over the billionaire American drug smuggler - and sent a strong warning to judges about name suppression and secrecy in court. Two justices found that a District Court judge who discharged the billionaire without conviction and suppressed his name during the America's Cup had overlooked the Bill of Rights Act and acted wrongly in law. The judgment yesterday lent weight to the Herald's charge that the man had been given unusual treatment and his identity kept secret after negotiations away from open court and never made public. It found that the paper had an explicit right to challenge the name suppression, and accepted the Herald's application to overturn the permanent suppression order. However, the newspaper must wait five working days to publish the name of the man, known here only as L, while he decides whether to appeal. In their decision, Justice Potter and Justice Nicholson strongly criticise Judge David Harvey for the way he handled the billionaire's appearances in the Otahuhu District Court on January 6 and 7. "Having regard to L's wealth and his payment of $53,000 to a charity, the granting of discharge without conviction and the name suppression which followed could as submitted by [Herald lawyer Bruce Gray] have created an unfortunate impression that name suppression could be purchased." They said Judge Harvey made an error of law by seemingly failing to consider the Bill of Rights - specifically the public's right to freedom of speech and to receive information, and the role of the media as surrogates of the public in attending and reporting court hearings. Justices Potter and Nicholson said Judge Harvey was not told that the billionaire was already well known in his home country as a supporter of a campaign to legalise marijuana, and was therefore unable to take that into account when he made his orders. They said there appeared to be an unfortunate link between the billionaire's payment of $53,000 to the Odyssey House drug rehabilitation centre and the order suppressing his name. That link made it even more regrettable that Judge Harvey did not give the reasons for his ruling. Justices Potter and Nicholson said it also concerned them that some submissions were presented to Judge Harvey behind closed doors, and that the Herald did not have access to other submissions handed to Judge Harvey on behalf of the billionaire. The ruling includes an order that the billionaire pay the Herald's legal costs for the High Court hearing. The decision follows a seven-month legal battle by the Herald to name the 66-year-old businessman who admitted smuggling more than 100g of cannabis resin and plant into the country. The billionaire's lawyer, Marie Dyhrberg, said she would consider her options and take instructions from her client. She has until the end of Tuesday next week to decide if she will appeal. The Herald's Mr Gray said the decision was a "clear signal" that the Judiciary needed good reason to interfere with freedom of speech, and that those reasons should be explained in any judgment. "The court agrees that the Herald's stand was the right one, and that we've done the right thing. Although this was an apparently minor case, it involved important issues of principle and the court has recognised this." - ---