Yvette Nikolic’s freedom is hanging by a thread
Interpol or the Australian Federal Police could be called in to assist if the Fiji DPP appeals the acquittal of Yvette Nikolic, who is now back in Australia.
National
Don't miss out on the headlines from National. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Lawyers for the Nikolics have raised doubts over whether an appeal can be served on a recently-freed Yvette, who is now back in Australia.
Having been found not guilty of drug smuggling and weapons offences in the Suva High Court on February 18, Ms Nikolic left Fiji the next day.
While Fiji has a bilateral agreement with Australia which allows for the extradition of fugitives, Justice Daniel Goundar found Ms Nikolic had no case to answer, so is not a fugitive.
The Fiji Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) yesterday released a statement saying it was ‘considering’ appealing Ms Nikolic’s acquittal.
MORE: Yvette Nikolic facing appeal against acquittal
MORE: John Nikolic faces life after guilty verdict
MORE: Nikolic’s new life in Fiji jail revealed
ANALYSIS: John Nikolic safer in prison than outside
The development came on the same day her husband, former Melbourne racehorse trainer John Nikolic, was found guilty of drug smuggling and weapons offences.
Thirteen bars of cocaine, other drugs, fully-loaded guns, ammunition and $US15,000 in $100 notes were found on board the Nikolics’ yacht Shenanigans when it was raided at Denarau Marina on June 22 last year.
Yvette Nikolic was listed as the owner of the catamaran and John Nikolic — who will be sentenced late next week — as the master.
Counsel for John Nikolic, Wasu Pillay, told News Corp Australia today it was no simple matter to bring Yvette Nikolic back to Fiji on appeal, now that she was a free woman.
“It is well within the DPP’s rights to file an appeal,” Mr Pillay said.
“But what happens after an appeal is filed is the DPP has to ensure it’s personally served. That is one of the requirements under the rules. If it’s not served, then they have to make an application to serve it under jurisdiction and have it effected. The ‘no case to answer’ decision came nearly two weeks ago and they have 28 days, as of right, to appeal … once it’s filed, then the issue of service comes in and Mr (Ronald) Gordon’s client Yvette is out of jurisdiction, so they have to consider how they are going to effect service.”
An ODPP spokeswoman said a decision would be made on whether to file an appeal “in due course” and would not comment further.
A source told News Corp Australia Interpol or Australian Federal Police could be called upon to assist, if an appeal proceeded.
Both agencies have consistently refused to comment on the Nikolic case, referring the matter back to Fiji authorities.
The news comes as the Suva High Court civil battle between the Fiji Revenue and Customs Service (FRCS) and the Nikolics for possession of Shenanigans and $US15,000 found hidden in one of its walls continues.
In arguing Ms Nikolic had the right to have the yacht she owned returned to her, as well as be given the cash, Mr Pillay today told the court she should not be disadvantaged by her husband’s “sins”.
“If an owner has no knowledge of the sins of the master and is not complicit … the owner ought not to be punished by forfeiture … Yvette should not be punished by the loss of her ship,” Mr Pillay argued.
In the recent Suva High Court criminal case, Justice Daniel Goundar had found Ms Nikolic had no knowledge of the drugs or guns on the boat, he said.
“It is the sins of someone else,” Mr Pillay said.
However, Mr Drisi Verebalavu, for the FRCS, said ownership of the yacht was irrelevant under the Customs Act, in allowing for it to be forfeited.
The fact Shenanigans (frequently referred to throughout proceedings as “the ship”) was used to conceal prohibited items was the only thing that mattered, Mr Verebalavu said.
“That is sufficient to forfeit the ship,” he said.
Justice David Alfred said as both lawyers had been “so able and accurate in their advocacy” for their clients, he had to put his thinking cap on before delivering a judgment, which would be possibly in the next 10 days.
The court heard the FRCS planned to sell Shenanigans if it was successful in its application for its forfeiture.
Justice Alfred, on learning the yacht was named Shenanigans, asked Mr Pillay if he knew what the word meant.
“A good time, My Lord,” Mr Pillay proferred.
“I shall look it up … and refer to it my judgment,” Justice Alfred countered.
Originally published as Yvette Nikolic’s freedom is hanging by a thread
Major flaw in new disinformation law
Instead of reining in social media giants, the government’s new law is letting them police themselves. We know what happens when we ask the fox to guard the henhouse, writes senior lawyer David Mejia-Canales.
Family terror links spark Palestinian visa questions
A Palestinian man granted a visa to Australia has previously hosted political members of listed terror organisation at his Gaza art institute, and had multiple brothers and sons affiliated with the same violent groups.