First Supreme Court challenge to Operation Ironside orders could be lodged as early as this week
The first Supreme Court challenge to the validity of police tactics used in the lead up to Operation Ironside arrests could be launched as early as this week.
SA News
Don't miss out on the headlines from SA News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
The first legal challenge to the tactics police used as part of Operation Ironside could be launched as early as this week.
On Friday, lawyers for several of the people accused of being key players in South Australian organised crime indicated they would be challenging a court order requiring their clients to provide a list of their assets.
Among several objections was the crucial question of whether requiring one of the accused to list their assets – including bank accounts, properties, cars and cryptocurrency – would be a form of self-incrimination.
Justice Greg Parker, who made the initial order ahead of mass arrests and property seizures in June, indicated he could send questions of law to the full court to resolve the issue.
Justice Parker explained to the court that, on Saturday June 5, he had made orders under the Criminal Assets Confiscation Act restraining and seizing assets belonging to the numerous accused, who would be arrested two days later.
At the same time, and as part of the same application, Justice Parker made an order under section 40 of the Act requiring the accused to prepare signed affidavits listing their assets.
“There is a challenge by (Scott Henchliffe QC) to the validity of that order, on the basis that section 40 doesn’t give me the power to do it,” Justice Parker said.
“Secondly, that there should have been a separate application to be dealt with aside from the original application.
“The third argument, and perhaps the most legally significant, is that the obligation to provide a list of assets may infringe their privilege against self-incrimination.”
Self-incrimination is a fundamental legal principle stating no one should be forced to answer questions which expose them to any criminal charge, penalty or forfeiture.
Mr Henchliffe represented two Ironside accused in the hearing, which only focused on freezing and restraining assets while criminal proceedings are underway.
Because of Mr Henchliffe’s seniority, he went first in the proceedings and was followed by several other counsel, who indicated they would likely reserve their position on the list of assets until the matter had been dealt with.
The asset seizures, which accompanied the arrest of 40 accused on June 7, have played an important part in Operation Ironside.
During the same hearing on Friday, Justice Parker froze or restrained luxury cars, interstate properties, expensive watches, jewellery, cryptocurrency, online betting accounts and more than a million dollars in different bank accounts.
As part of the first police press conference after the Ironside arrests, police showed photos of seized luxury cars. They also displayed $1.8m cash, which had been seized at various houses.
Operation Ironside was based on information from AN0M, an encrypted phone app which was being monitored by the Australian Federal Police and international law enforcement.
Questions have already been raised by defence counsel about the admissibility of evidence obtained from the app, but there has not been opportunity to challenge the validity of the warrants in South Australia.
More Coverage
Originally published as First Supreme Court challenge to Operation Ironside orders could be lodged as early as this week
‘Growing problem’: Alcohol a concern as community reacts to death of fruit picker
As police continue to investigate a Pacific Island fruit picker’s drowning, a community leader has said alcohol abuse among migrant workers is ‘an ongoing challenge’.
Ex-Hindley St cop lifts lid on ‘ridiculous’ party strip patrols
The recently retired veteran can finally reveal what it’s really like for police on Adelaide’s notorious party precinct – and what they do to cope with the challenges.