Test case for meth sentencing under way

AUCKLAND: A major shakeup of prison sentences for methamphetamine crimes in New Zealand has been suggested in a potentially landmark case before the Court of Appeal.

The effectiveness of long prison sentences in deterring people from methamphetamine offending was questioned in front of the five senior judges, especially for those considered ‘‘disposable’’ by organised crime syndicates or caught in addiction.

‘‘If we think we can punish our way out of this, we’re deluding ourselves,’’ said Marc Corlett QC, who is representing two of the six appeal cases being heard together.

To illustrate the significance of the hearing, the Human Rights Commission, the New Zealand Law Society, the Criminal Bar Association and the Maori Medical Practitioners Association and the New Zealand Maori Law Society instructed legal counsel to join the appeal.

The twoday hearing in front of the Court of Appeal will essentially review the sentencing guidelines established in the R v Fatu case.

Since 2005, the weight of the Class A drug has been the most important factor in sentencing individuals convicted of manufacturing, importing or supplying methamphetamine.

Depending on the quantity of methamphetamine, the guideline judgement established four bands — with an upper and lower limit — of prison sentences.

Anything over 500g of methamphetamine is considered to be in the most serious Fatu band, with a minimum starting point of 10 years in prison and a maximum of life.

Only once someone is placed into one of the four bands is an individual’s role — whether a lowly drug ‘‘mule’’ or kingpin at the top of the criminal organisation — taken into account by the judge.

The quantity of drugs, argued Mr Corlett, should not be the most significant marker of criminal culpability.

He pointed to one of his clients, a 20yearold from Hong Kong who was paid $10,000 to supervise the delivery of 60kg of the drug.

Lok Sing Yip was sentenced to 16 years, six months in prison, despite the judge describing him as a ‘‘mere employee’’ of an organised crime syndicate.

‘‘Deterrence [from long prison sentences] is not in fact something that changes behaviour, or taken into account for decision making, except for those at top of the organisation,’’ said Mr Corlett.

Lowly ‘‘catchers’’ who receive the drug packages, or ‘‘mules’’ who physically smuggle the drugs, were disposable to the organised criminal organisations who took advantage of them, said Mr Corlett.

He favoured a more nuanced approach where quantity and role were taken into account when determining someone’s culpability.

It was a submission echoed by Andrew Butler, on behalf of the Human Rights Commission, and James Rapley QC, on behalf of the New Zealand Law Society and New Zealand Bar Association.

A rare ‘‘full bench’’ of five Court of Appeal judges, headed by president Justice Kos, will hear the submissions of the Crown in response to the appeal today. — NZME