Supreme Court dismisses ex-notary’s Ponzi appeal
The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed a leave to appeal by former Vancouver notary Rashida Samji of her criminal conviction for operating a $110-million Ponzi scheme.
The decision by the high court not to hear Samji’s appeal was announced Friday.
It means that Samji, who had been out on bail pending the decision, will now serve her six-year sentence handed down in B.C. Supreme Court in 2016.
In her Supreme Court of Canada appeal, Samji had made similar arguments as she had at the B.C. Court of Appeal, that because she had already been penalized by the B.C. Securities Commission she should not face a criminal conviction.
As is practice, the Supreme Court of Canada did not provide reasons for its decision not to hear the appeal.
In 2017, the B.C. Court of Appeal dismissed Samji’s bid to throw out her criminal conviction for fraud.
Samji launched her appeal on the basis that she should not face jail time when she has already been fined $33 million by the B.C. Securities Commission.
In its decision, the Court of Appeal ruled that while the commission had issued a substantial administrative penalty, it was not punitive.
“It was a protective and preventive order designed to deter similar fraudulent conduct, not to denounce the appellant’s conduct or reflect her moral blameworthiness,” according to the appeal decision written by Justice Barbara Fisher and supported by Chief Justice Robert Bauman and Justice John Hunter.
The appeal court concluded that a stay under the Charter of Rights was not warranted either, as Samji had not answered to society at large for her conduct, and a stay “would likely cause the public to lose confidence in the integrity of the justice system.”
Samji’s case is a rare criminal conviction for investor fraud, according to a 2017 Postmedia investigation.
As few as eight police-investigated cases have landed fraudsters in jail in the past decade, according to a review of court records and news files.
In her criminal conviction, Samji, who is in her 60s, was also ordered to pay restitution of more than $10 million to her victims.
The judge said aggravating factors included that the fraud exceeded millions, had the effect of potentially destabilizing capital markets, and involved a large number of victims, as many as 200.