CRIMES ACT 1914 - PART 1AB

CONTROLLED OPERATIONS

FIRST ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 15T

1996-1997

 


© Commonwealth of Australia 1997


TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTROLLED OPERATIONS
Introduction
Comment
Accountability
Legislation
Law Enforcement Observations on the Legislation
Section 15T
Judicial Consideration of Part 1AB
 
APPLICATIONS FOR A CERTIFICATE AUTHORISING A CONTROLLED OPERATION
Certificates Issued by Senior Officers of the AFP
Certificates Issued by the Chairperson and Members of the NCA

 

INDEX OF CERTIFICATES
ER1/96 ER9/97 ER24/97 CR1/97 SR3/96
ER2/96 ER10/97 ER25/97 NR1/96 SR4/96
ER5/96 ER11/97 ER26/97 NR2/96 SR5/96
ER6/96 ER12/97 ER27/97 NR3/96 SR1/97
ER7/96 ER13/97 ER28/97 NR4/96 SR2/97
ER8/96 ER14/97 ER29/97 NR5/96 SR3/97
ER9/96 ER15/97 WR1/96 NR7/96 SR4/97
ER1/97 ER16/97 WR2/96 NR1/97 SNCA1/96
ER2/97 ER17/97 WR3/96 NR2/97 SNCA2/96
ER3/97 ER18/97 WR4/96 NR3/97 SNCA3/96
ER4/97 ER19/97 WR1/97 NR4/97 SNCA1/97
ER5/97 ER20/97 WR2/97 NR5/97 SNCA2/97
ER6/97 ER21/97 WR3/97 NR6/97 SNCA3/97
ER7/97 ER22/97 CR1/96A SR1/96 SNCA4/97
ER8/97 ER23/97 CR1/96B SR2/96 PNCA1/97

 


CONTROLLED OPERATIONS

Introduction

‘Controlled Operation’ is an expression used to describe a covert operation by a law enforcement agency carried out for the purpose of gathering evidence that may lead to the identification and prosecution of a person for a criminal offence. Such operations are most commonly employed by Commonwealth law enforcement agencies in connection with investigations surrounding the importation of narcotic goods.

Importation and trafficking in narcotic goods is a clandestine criminal activity frequently carried out in a highly organised manner with subterfuge, deceit and elaborate concealment methods. It is a major priority of Commonwealth law enforcement agencies to detect and apprehend the individuals and networks involved.

Prior to 1995, Commonwealth law enforcement agencies relied upon the common law and Ministerial arrangements to engage in controlled operations. The most recent Ministerial agreement was made between the then Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce and the then Special Minister of State and came into effect on 3 June 1987. The agreement addresses the relationship between the Australian Customs Service (ACS), the National Crime Authority (NCA) and the Australian Federal Police (AFP) with respect to narcotic drug law enforcement.

On 19 April 1995 the High Court handed down its decision in the matter of Ridgeway v The Queen. By a majority of 6-1 the court decided that where law enforcement officials use a controlled operation during an investigation into narcotics trafficking and, as a result, commit an element of an offence with which a defendant is charged, a court should normally refuse to admit the evidence of that element against the defendant.

The central issue in ridgeway was the admissibility of evidence. The High Court held that, because of the involvement of law enforcement officers in the importation of heroin, the evidence obtained thereby was tainted and should be excluded from the trial. Some members of the court indicated that if law enforcement officers are to engage in such conduct in the course of investigations, a legislative scheme authorising it would need to be established.

As a result, Part 1AB of the Crimes Act 1914 was enacted. It commenced operation on 8 July 1996. Part 1AB provides for the conduct of controlled operations by Australian law enforcement agencies.

Under section 15H of the Act:

A controlled operation is an operation that:

By exempting law enforcement officers from criminal liability for certain conduct related to importation, exportation or possession of narcotic goods, Part 1AB ensures that evidence resulting from such conduct is not excluded from evidence under the principles enunciated in Ridgeway by reason of that conduct alone.

 

Comment

Controlled operations are an internationally accepted investigatory technique. Australia is a signatory to the 1988 United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. That Convention provides inter alia, if a country’s legislation allows, for the appropriate use of controlled deliveries at the international level with a view to identifying persons involved in organised trafficking.

Part 1AB was enacted to permit the admissibility of evidence where law enforcement officers participate in the act of importing narcotic goods. Experience has shown however, that a range of other law enforcement activity not necessarily related to the act of importation or direct participation of law enforcement officers has also required the issue of certificates. Attention has also been drawn to the operational difficulties of the legislation particularly in relation to the pre-requisites for the authorisation of a controlled operation. Those difficulties will be monitored.

Certificates have been issued under four general categories of law enforcement activity:

A

This scenario, which most closely mirrors the Ridgeway situation, has resulted in only a small number of certificates being issued:

  • The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation are imported into Australia with the participation of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation is issued in order to permit the law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, and to obtain evidence and of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act.

B

The following scenario frequently occurs where the narcotic goods are detected at the Customs barrier, either at an airport, a seaport, or an international postal exchange. These types of operation comprise the largest category:

  • The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation are imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and seized by the ACS on entry. The certificate is issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from ACS control to the intended recipient, which in the absence of a certificate may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

C

The following scenario covers situations where information is received concerning the possible importation of narcotic goods and the criminal activity is monitored without any law enforcement participation:

  • The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation are imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement. However, the law enforcement officers have prior knowledge that the importation might occur and the certificate is issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass through ACS control unimpeded in order to gain evidence of the commission of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act.

One of the factors influencing the decision to issue certificates in operations which do not specifically fall in to the strict Ridgeway category is whether officers of the ACS are permitted by the Customs Act to allow goods to pass through the barrier, where there is a suspicion of drugs, for the purpose of a controlled operation. In the circumstances, legal advice has been that a certificate should be issued under Part 1AB of the Crimes Act.

D

The following scenario covered a single case where, in an undercover capacity, the AFP attempted to acquire a quantity of drugs in Australia in order to obtain evidence and intelligence of the commission of an offence:

  • The narcotic goods, the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement. However, the certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to attempt to acquire a quantity of drugs in order to obtain evidence and intelligence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act, which in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Accountability

Part 1AB of the Crimes Act sets out a full and open system of accountability in terms of the application and approval processes for certificates and the requirement for issued certificates to be tendered in evidence in prosecutions for subsequent offences.

The Act requires that the responsible Minister, the Attorney-General, is kept informed of all applications for a certificate conferring authority to conduct a controlled operation. The Attorney-General is also informed of the outcome of a controlled operation at the conclusion of the operation. In turn, the Attorney-General is required to table a report to each House of the Parliament providing details of the applications made under the provisions of the Act and the outcome of the operations authorised.

 

Legislation

The principal elements of Part 1AB are as follows:

By exempting law enforcement officers from criminal liability for certain conduct related to importation, exportation or possession of narcotic goods, Part 1AB ensures that evidence resulting form such conduct is not excluded from evidence under the principles enunciated in Ridgeway by reason of that conduct alone. The transitional provisions of the Part directly reverse the discretionary principles laid down in Ridgeway in the case of certain importations carried out under conditions agreed by the AFP and ACS under the 1987 Ministerial Agreement.

 

Law Enforcement Observations on the Legislation

The AFP, NCA and DPP have drawn attention to some operational difficulties encountered in applying the legislation. These will be monitored and, if appropriate, a proposal for amendment of the legislation may be brought forward in due course.

 

Section 15T

Section 15T requires the Minister to lay a report about controlled operations before each House of Parliament. The report must include the following information in respect of each application for a certificate authorising a controlled operation made in the period from the commencement of the legislation (8 July 1996) until 30 June 1997:

In addition, the annual report must include the information given to the Minister pursuant to section 15S of the Act, which requires the authorising officer to give the Minister a report within 3 months after the certificate ceases to be in force. The report to the Minister under section 15S must state whether or not the controlled operation was carried out. If the controlled operation was carried out, the report to the Minister under section 15S must also:

It should be noted that the annual reporting requirement is subject to provisos in subsection 15T(3) and (4). Subsection 15T(3) prohibits the annual report from mentioning anything about the named person that has not already been published. Subsection 15T(4) requires the Minister, based on the advice of the AFP Commissioner or the NCA Chairperson, to exclude from the annual report information that may endanger the safety of a person or prejudice an investigation. The omitted information must then be included in the first annual report tabled after these risks no longer exist.

Some details have been omitted from the schedules in this annual report pursuant to subsections 15T(3) and (4)

The schedules are arranged in the following order:

 

Judicial Consideration of Part 1AB

Nicholas

Division 3 of Part 1AB is the subject of a constitutional challenge in the matter of Nicholas before the High Court. A full report of the matter will be included in the next annual report if a decision has been handed down before that time.

 


APPLICATIONS FOR A CERTIFICATE AUTHORISING A CONTROLLED OPERATION


Certificates Issued by Senior Officers of the AFP

ER1/96
Date of Application: 16 July 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain 820 grams of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 17 July 1996, Australian Federal Police members conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted) which was accepted by a person who then met with two other people. The three were interviewed. Alfred Raymond Teagle was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901. The matter has been completed.

The narcotic goods have been destroyed.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER2/96
Date of Application: 16 August 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS intercepted a package in Sydney which was found to contain 532.9 grams of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment contained a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 16 August 1996, members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted) which was accepted by two people who conveyed the package to a second address.

Later that day, AFP members entered the premises and arrested Dili Puloka and Hofaka Lomu. Both persons have been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER5/96
Date of Application: 20 August 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain
2.0065 kilograms of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 27 August 1996, members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic, the remainder of which had been substituted). Two people were arrested and charged with possess and attempt to possess a prohibited import under section 233B(1)(c) of the Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER6/96
Date of Application: 11 August 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS intercepted a consignment consisting of three crates which had been forwarded to Australia from Thailand. The crates contained three marble vases. An examination of the vases located a total of 13.993 kilograms of heroin concealed in the bases of the marble vases. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • enquiries conducted by police had established that the consignee lived at the nominated address; and
  • if not apprehended, he would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 12 August 1996, Manh Tien Nguyen took delivery of the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic, the remainder of which had been substituted). He was followed to a Sydney address where a search warrant was executed on the premises. As a result of the controlled operation Manh Tien Nguyen was arrested and charged with possess prohibited import under section 233B(1)(c) of the Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER7/96
Date of Application: 15 November 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS inspected a container which was found to contain 5 tonnes of cannabis. The container had been consigned to Australia from Cambodia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under theCustoms Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 14 December 1997.

The bulk of the narcotic goods has been destroyed. A sample is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER8/96
Date of Application: 18 November 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain
259.2 grams (990 tablets) of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 19 November 1996, members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). Later that day a search warrant was executed on the premises. The package was recovered unopened.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER9/96
Date of Application: 31 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of this controlled operation were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Custom Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from ACS control to the intended recipient, which in the absence of a certificate may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

On 31 December 1996 ACS members examined an unaccompanied suitcase and located 3.93 kilograms of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment involved a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of life imprisonment or for such period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the opportunity to identify the principals in Australia who have financed and organised the importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 31 December 1996 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation and delivered the narcotic goods to the recipients premises. A short time Later Victor Hugo Jimenez was arrested leaving the premises. He has been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER1/97
Date of Application: 4 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined a box which was found to contain 1.7 kilograms of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the box contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie physical and electronic surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 11 February 1997, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic, the remainder of which had been substituted). The package was delivered and accepted by the consignee, Hery Budiman. Budiman took the package to another address and commenced to retrieve the MDMA. Police executed a search warrant and retrieved the drugs. Budiman was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER2/97
Date of Application: 15 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members ACS searched the luggage of an incoming passenger which was found to contain approximately 4 kilograms of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the luggage contained a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person/s for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 17 February 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). As a result of the controlled operation police executed a search warrant on premises occupied by the recipient and recovered the consignment. The recipient was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

Exclusion of Information The name of the person arrested as a result of this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing the persons name may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER3/97
Date of Application: 25 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of a container which was found to contain a quantity of cannabis. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed within the period of the certificate which expired on 25 March 1997.
Exclusion of information: The precise detail surrounding this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing those details may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER4/97
Date of Application: 13 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain
475.2 grams of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA, under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not apprehended, he would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation takes place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 14 March 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). As a result of the controlled operation an offender was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

Exclusion of Information The name of the person arrested as a result of this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing the offenders name may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER5/97
Date of Application: 14 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain 333.7 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the serious nature of the matter under investigation and the nature of concealment;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 17 March 1997, members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic, the remainder of which had been substituted). Yan Lin Mao and Chandarajay Ngem were arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER6/97
Date of Application: 21 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain
335.1 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • the similarities with a previous importation, controlled operation ER5/97;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under theCustoms Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 24 March 1997, members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). Sovan Pen and Kim Mai were arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER7/97
Date of Application: 25 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of a container which was found to contain a quantity of cannabis. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a second certificate authorising the controlled operation. The previous certificate, ER3/97, expired on 25 March 1997.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed within the period of the certificate which expired on 23 April 1997.
Exclusion of Information: The precise detail surrounding this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing those details may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER8/97
Date of Application: 21 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain
297.5 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 24 March 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) attempted to conduct a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). The occupant of the premises would not accept delivery of the consignment.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER9/97
Date of Application: 2 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS intercepted a package which was found to contain
7.4799 kilograms of 3, 4-Methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, commonly known as MDEA. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDEA, under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person/s may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 3 April 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). As a result Amanda Tze Wen Lo and Fouad El-Hassan were arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER10/97
Date of Application: 3 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of a number of mail articles which were found to contain 737.7 grams of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the articles contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA, under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 6 April 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

A search warrant was executed on the premises and the controlled sample was recovered. No charges have been laid.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER11/97
Date of Application: 4 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS searched the luggage of an incoming passenger and
4.954 kilograms of tablets concealed inside the suitcases which were found to be 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the luggage contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA, under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the nature of the concealment;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 4 April 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation. Due to the nature of the concealment the narcotic goods, consisting of a quantity of MDMA, were not substituted.

The controlled operation resulted in the arrest of Brett Wayne Power who has been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER12/97
Date of Application: 10 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS searched the luggage of an incoming passenger and found it to contain 9 kilograms of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the luggage contained a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The operation was terminated on 11 December 1996. A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER13/97
Date of Application: 7 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation were imported into Australia with the participation of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit the law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic offence without there being a certificate in force, to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the importation of 8 kilograms of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment involved a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • information received from the United States Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration (USDEA) regarding a similar package which was alleged to have contained 30-35 kilograms of cocaine;
  • investigations conducted by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) which supported the information provided by the USDEA;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 7 April 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). The package was recovered unopened. To date no person/s have been charged.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER14/97
Date of Application: 14 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of two packages and found them to contain 396 tablets of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 13 May 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). The controlled sample was recovered un-opened.

Subsequent enquiries conducted by the AFP has resulted in the arrest of an offender who has been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

Exclusion of Information The name of the person arrested as a result of this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing the offenders name may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER15/97
Date of Application: 28 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of this controlled operation were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Custom Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from ACS control to the intended recipient, which in the absence of a certificate may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined a container and located 78 kilograms of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the sophisticated nature of the concealment and the large quantity of heroin imported clearly suggested that a highly organised group were behind the financing, organisation and intended distribution of the narcotics involved;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 2 May 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

The operation resulted in the arrest of Vo Thi Do, Ung Heeng,
Tung Chew Hoong and Leung Yiu Man who have been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER16/97
Date of Application: 24 April 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of this controlled operation were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Custom Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from ACS control to the intended recipient, which in the absence of a certificate may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of a container which was found to contain a quantity of cannabis. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a third certificate authorising the controlled operation. Previous certificates, ER3/97 and ER7/97 expired before a controlled operation could be conducted.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed within the period of the certificate which expired on 24 May 1997.
Exclusion of Information: The precise detail surrounding this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing those details may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER17/97
Date of Application: 2 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 682 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 16 May 1997. The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with Australian Federal Police Drugs Policy and Procedure guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER18/97
Date of Application: 2 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 686.8 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 8 May 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) delivered the package to the intended address. A short time later police executed a search warrant on the premises and recovered the package unopened.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER19/97
Date of Application: 5 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 4 kilograms of cannabis. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $4,000 or 10 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 6 May 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) delivered the package to the intended address. A short time later police executed a search warrant on the premises and recovered the package unopened.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER20/97
Date of Application: 5 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 672.4 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 7 May 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) delivered the package to the intended address. A short time later police executed a search warrant on the premises and recovered the package unopened.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER21/97
Date of Application: 22 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 1.055 kilograms of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the nature of the concealment which appears directly linked to other matters under investigation (ER17/97, ER18/97 and ER20/97 refer);
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 6 June 1997.

This operation involved the importation of 1.055 kilograms of heroin. The narcotic goods are in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER22/97
Date of Application: 23 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of this controlled operation were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Custom Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from ACS control to the intended recipient, which in the absence of a certificate may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of a container which was found to contain a quantity of cannabis. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a third certificate authorising the controlled operation. Previous certificates, ER3/97, ER7/97 and ER16/97 expired before a controlled operation could be conducted.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed within the period of the certificate which expired on 22 June 1997.
Exclusion of Information: The precise detail surrounding this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing those details may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER23/97
Date of Application: 22 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 1.060 kilograms of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the nature of the concealment which appears directly linked to other matters under investigation (ER17/97, ER18/97, ER20/97 and ER21/97 refer);
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation; conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 26 May 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). As a result Quang Hong Do was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

This operation involved the importation of 1.060 kilograms of heroin. The narcotic goods are in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER24/97
Date of Application: 2 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation were imported into Australia with the participation of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit the law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the proposed importation of a 5 kilogram consignment of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment involved a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect/s appear to be involved in major drug importations;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

As a result information obtained by the Australian Federal Police (AFP), and an undercover operation conducted by the United States of America (US) Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 6 kilograms of cocaine was seized in the US and carried to Australia by members of the DEA.

On 5 May 1997 members of the AFP conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

The operation resulted in the arrest of Kevin Michael Geraghty, Danny Weininger, Anthony Peter Woodcroft and Dennis Robert Donoghue who have been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The controlled sample (20 grams) of cocaine used in the controlled operation was not recovered. A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER25/97
Date of Application: 6 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS searched a passenger on arrival and found a number of body packs strapped to his person. These were found to contain
1.785 kilograms of cocaine. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the body packs contained a trafficable quantity of cocaine under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: On 6 June 1997 Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation which resulted in the arrest of two persons, Timothy Terrence McCluskey and Stephen Watson. Both were charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901. The bulk of the narcotic goods are currently under secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines. A sample of the cocaine (10.82 grams) is in the custody of the Australian Analytical Laboratories.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER26/97
Date of Application: 17 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of the ACS examined the contents of a package which was found to contain 134.7 grams of 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA or Ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 19 June 1997 members of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

Following the execution of a search warrant on the premises police established that the controlled sample (20 grams) had been placed in a toilet, destroying a portion of the narcotic goods. The remainder was recovered and is currently being re-examined by the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories (AGAL).

Two persons have been arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A sample of the narcotic goods is in secure storage at AGAL. The bulk is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

Exclusion of Information: The name of the person arrested as a result of this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing the offenders name may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER27/97
Date of Application: 16 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation were imported into Australia with the participation of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the importation of 3.5 kilograms of heroin into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment involved a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the opportunity to identify the principals in Australia who have financed and organised the importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on
14 July 1997.
Exclusion of Information: The precise detail of this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing those details may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER28/97
Date of Application: 23 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Members of ACS examined the contents of a container which was found to contain a quantity of cannabis. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the container contained a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation had been committed; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a third certificate authorising the controlled operation. Previous certificates, ER3/97, ER7/97, ER16/97 and ER22/97 expired before a controlled operation could be conducted.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed within the period of the certificate which expired on 23 July 1997.
Exclusion of Information: The precise detail surrounding this controlled operation has been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing those details may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

ER29/97
Date of Application: 3 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of this controlled operation were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Custom Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from ACS control to the intended recipient, which in the absence of a certificate may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

On 26 May 1997 ACS members examined an incoming package and located 8.9 kilograms of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment involved a commercial quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of life imprisonment or for such period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the opportunity to identify the principals in Australia who have financed and organised the importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 16 June 1997.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR1/96
Date of Application: 29 July 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the proposed importation of 2 kilograms of heroin into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment involved a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • information indicated that a regular supply of heroin could be obtained;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 16 August 1996, Reinhold Erhard Olbrich, a German citizen, who was the subject of a proposed controlled operation in Perth, was arrested in Sydney by Australian Federal Police (AFP) members in possession of approximately 1.5 kilograms of heroin.

Olbrich was charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

A controlled operation was not undertaken due to the certificate being issued for use in Perth only.

The drugs are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures awaiting destruction.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR2/96
Date of Application: 30 August 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

ACS officers intercepted a package which was found to contain
1000 tablets of 3, 4-Methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, also known as MDEA or Eve. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDEA under the
    Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation has been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 3 September 1996, the package was collected by a minor (containing a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted) who caught a taxi to Perth airport. He was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B(1)(b) of the Customs Act 1901. The matter was prosecuted in the Children’s Court.

The operation involved the importation of 345 grams (1000 tablets) of MDEA. The drugs are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures awaiting destruction.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR3/96
Date of Application: 9 September 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

ACS officers searched an incoming Singaporean national, Eng Beng Lim, who was found to have 619 grams of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy, concealed in a body pack on his person. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the body pack contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the person was known to police;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 8 September 1996, Eng Beng Lim was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901. While initially Lim cooperated with the Australian Federal Police and the National Crime Authority, it became obvious that he had compromised the operation.

The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 16 September 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR4/96
Date of Application: 25 November 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

ACS officers examined the luggage of a British national, Michael John Fearns. Following an order obtained under section 219R of the Customs Act 1901 a search of Fearns revealed plastic bags which were found to contain 580 grams (2211 tablets) of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the
    Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 26 November 1996, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation and arranged for Fearns to deliver the narcotic goods (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted) to another person. The package was accepted by John Michael Maye who was subsequently arrested by the AFP.

Both men were charged with offences under section 233B of the
Customs Act 1901 and have been convicted and sentenced. Maye has appealed his sentence.

The operation involved the importation of 2211 tablets of MDMA. The drugs have been destroyed.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR1/97
Date of Application: 18 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Australian Federal Police (AFP) members seized an envelope under section 203C of the Customs Act 1901 which was found to contain 40 grams (160 tablets) of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the envelope contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation;
  • prima facie the offence of importation has been committed;
  • based on previous experience it is likely that, if confronted, the person/s involved in this importation would deny all knowledge; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 19 February 1997 AFP members delivered the package (containing a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). The package was collected by Raymond Behan. A search warrant was executed and the unopened package was recovered. A second identical package containing a further 40 grams (160 tablets) of MDMA was located and seized.

A search was then made of Behan’s premises where a third identical envelope containing 36 grams (144 tablets) of MDMA was located and seized.

Raymond Behan’s brother, Mitchell was spoken to and arrested on his return to Australia from the UK. Both have has been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The bulk of the seizure is being held awaiting destruction. Sub-samples are being held pending Court proceedings. All drugs are being held in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR2/97
Date of Application: 13 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

ACS officers searched an Indonesian national, Ansyar Heryadi,
who was found to be carrying 11 grams of cocaine, 41.6 grams of
3, 4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine, also known as MDA and 20 grams of
3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA concealed on his person. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the discovery involved a trafficable quantity of cocaine and MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

Heryadi was conveyed to a Hotel in Perth, where he was kept under police custody. No contact was made and the controlled operation did not eventuate.

Heryadi was arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The operation involved approximately 2800 tablets of MDA and MDMA weighing 61.6 grams and 11 grams of cocaine. The bulk of the seizure is being held awaiting destruction. Sub-samples are being held pending Court proceedings. All drugs are being held in secure storage in accordance with Australian Federal Police Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

WR3/97
Date of Application: 1 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service (ACS) on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

ACS officers searched Karl Franz Christa who was found to be carrying 50 grams of cocaine and 900 tablets of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy, in his baggage. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the discovery involved a trafficable quantity of cocaine and MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • conducting a controlled operation would provide police with an opportunity to identify the person/s involved in this importation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 2 May 1997 Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation (consisting of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

Two persons, Rupert James Smitheringale and Christopher Gerard Peers were arrested taking possession of the drugs. Christa, Smitheringale and Peers have been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The operation involved approximately 900 tablets of MDMA and 50 grams of cocaine. The bulk of the seizure is being held awaiting destruction. Sub-samples are being held pending Court proceedings. All drugs are being held in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

 

[ table of contents ]


CR1/96A
Date of Application: 15 August 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were to be imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement officers. However, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) had prior knowledge that the importation may occur and the certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass through Customs control unimpeded to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received by the AFP concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity of heroin into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions provided an opinion that the issuing of a certificate was necessary;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of person or persons committing offences contrary to section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation: The certificate expired on 15 September 1996. The controlled operation did not proceed.

[ table of contents ]


CR1/96B
Date of Application: 27 September 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were to be imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement officers. However, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) had prior knowledge that the importation may occur and the certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass through Customs control unimpeded to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received by the AFP concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity of heroin into Australia from Pakistan. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions provided an opinion that the issuing of a certificate was necessary;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of person or persons committing offences contrary to section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation: Two persons identified during this investigation were searched on their arrival in Australia from Pakistan. They were found in possession of a total of 180 grams of heroin. The controlled operation did not proceed and the certificate expired on
6 October 1996.

[ table of contents ]


CR1/97
Date of Application: 20 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, which are the subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by the Australian Customs Service on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to the gaining of evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a parcel which was found to contain 100 tablets of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, commonly known as MDMA. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of tablets of MDMA, under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • public concern over the increased availability of MDMA;
  • that on two separate occasions the person had travelled overseas and had forwarded money overseas;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for committing an offence contrary to section 233B of the Customs Act 1901;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the offenders were likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 21 February 1997 Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package, ( the narcotic goods had been substituted with an inert substance). Thomas Lamont collected the envelope and returned to premises in suburban Adelaide. Police executed a search warrant on the premises and retrieved the opened package. Lamont has been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines awaiting destruction.

[ table of contents ]


NR1/96
Date of Application: 22 August 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain 10 sheets (10,000 tabs) of LSD. The package had been forwarded to Australia from the United Kingdom. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of LSD under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the suspect may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the offender/s is likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 26 August 1996, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

The package was delivered by police to a road side mail box and subsequently collected by a person and taken to the intended premises. A short time later AFP members entered the premises under warrant. A search located the opened envelope in the fireplace of the premises. A thorough search failed to locate the missing sheet of LSD. No charges were laid.

Nine sheets (9,000 tabs) of LSD are under secure storage at the Australian Government Analytical Laboratories. One sheet (1,000 tabs) of LSD was not recovered and its current whereabouts are unknown.

[ table of contents ]


NR2/96
Date of Application: 10 October 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of an offence against section 20 of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, by allowing the movement of the goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted an offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain six kilograms of Sodiumgammahydroxybutyrate, also known as GHB or Fantasy.

The authorising officer issued the certificate prior to the narcotic being a scheduled article under the provision of the Customs Act 1901. This was done in the spirit of the legislation albeit that the legislation was not legally applicable.

Enquiries conducted by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) identified the intended recipient living at a Gold Coast address as being an associate of drug suppliers on the Gold Coast.

The person targeted by this operation was likely to commit an offence under section 20 of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 or an associated offence whether or not the operation took place.

This consignment was identified a short time after the collapse of 10 dance patrons on the Gold Coast as a result of ingesting Fantasy.

The authorising officer considered the activities of those concerned in this importation were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on
12 October 1996.

The drugs are currently under secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


NR3/96
Date of Application: 14 October 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of an offence against section 20 of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, by allowing the movement of the goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted an offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain six kilograms of Sodiumgammahydroxybutyrate, also known as GHB or Fantasy.

The authorising officer issued the certificate prior to the narcotic being a scheduled article under the provision of the Customs Act 1901. This was done in the spirit of the legislation albeit that it was not legally applicable.

Enquiries conducted by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) identified the intended recipient living at a Gold Coast address as being an associate of drug suppliers on the Gold Coast.

The person targeted by this operation was likely to commit an offence under section 20 of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 or an associated offence whether or not the operation took place.

This consignment was identified a short time after the collapse of 10 dance patrons on the Gold Coast as a result of ingesting Fantasy.

The authorising officer considered the activities of those concerned in this importation were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a second certificate authorising the controlled operation. The first certificate (NR2/96 refers) expired on 12 October 1996.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 14 October 1996, AFP members attempted to conduct a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted).

The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 21 October 1996.

The drugs are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP
Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


NR4/96
Date of Application: 21 November 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were to be imported into Australia with the knowledge of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity (six kilograms) of heroin into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of person or persons committing offences contrary to section 233B of the Customs Act 1901; and
  • if not apprehended, the offender/s is likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 19 December 1996.

[ table of contents ]


NR5/96
Date of Application: 10 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement officers. However, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) had prior knowledge that the importation may occur and the certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass to the intended recipient unimpeded to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

The AFP and the Australian Customs Service (ACS) had been investigating an alleged conspiracy to import a multi-tonne shipment of cannabis resin into Australia by vessel. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of cannabis resin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of life imprisonment or for such time as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • enquiries conducted by the AFP revealed that the suspected persons were involved in a major drug importation;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • information revealed that the suspect persons were involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the persons involved in this importation were likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a second certificate authorising the controlled operation. The first certificate, NR7/96, expired on 30 October 1996.

 

Conduct of Operation: Intelligence identified the probable landing point for the narcotic goods. AFP, ACS and Queensland Police members successfully intercepted the vessel and seized the narcotics goods. The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 31 December 1996.

[ table of contents ]


NR6/96
Date of Application: 24 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were to be imported into Australia with the knowledge of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity (six kilograms) of heroin into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of a person or persons for committing offences contrary to section 233B of the Customs Act 1901;
  • if not apprehended, the offender/s is likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a second certificate authorising the controlled operation. The first certificate (NR4/96 refers) expired on
19 December 1996.

 

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 20 January 1997.

[ table of contents ]


NR7/96
Date of Application: 11 October 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement officers. However, the AFP had prior knowledge that the importation may occur and the certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass to the intended recipient unimpeded to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

The Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Customs Service had been investigating an alleged conspiracy to import a multi-tonne shipment of cannabis resin, into Australia by vessel. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of cannabis resin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of life imprisonment or for such time as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • enquiries conducted by the AFP revealed that the suspected persons were involved in a major drug importation;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • information revealed that the suspect persons were involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the persons involved in this importation were likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation: The proposed delivery did not occur and the controlled operation was not carried out. The certificate expired on 30 October 1996.

[ table of contents ]


 

NR1/97
Date of Application: 20 January 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were to be imported into Australia with the knowledge of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued to permit law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity (six kilograms) of heroin into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the importation concerned a commercial quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of a person or persons for committing offences contrary to section 233B of the Customs Act 1901; and
  • if not apprehended, the offender/s is likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a third certificate authorising the controlled operation. The first certificate, NR4/96, expired on 19 December 1996. The second certificate, NR6/96, expired on 20 January 1997.

 

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 17 February 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

NR2/97
Date of Application: 20 January 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain 160 grams of cannabis resin concealed inside a book. The package had been forwarded to Australia from the Netherlands. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of cannabis resin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the person had made enquiries at Australia Post as to the whereabouts of a package he was expecting;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the person could be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 28 January 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

NR3/97
Date of Application: 28 January 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain 160 grams of cannabis resin concealed inside a book. The package had been forwarded to Australia from the Netherlands. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of cannabis resin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • an earlier controlled operation which did not proceed (NR2/97 refers);
  • the person had made enquiries at Australia Post as to the whereabouts of a package he was expecting;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • a consistent course of conduct displayed by target involved in this, and a previous importation (NR2/97 refers); and
  • if not apprehended, the person involved in this importation is likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 30 January 1997, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation. The package was collected by the suspect and taken to business premises. After police questioning, a search warrant was executed on a vehicle and the opened package containing the cannabis resin was retrieved. Peter Edwin Yates was arrested and charged with offences pursuant to the section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 and the
Queensland Drugs Misuse Act 1986
.

The drugs are currently under secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

NR4/97
Date of Application: 17 January 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods were to be imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement officers. However, the Australian Federal Police had prior knowledge that the importation may occur and the certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass through Customs control unimpeded to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the possible importation of a quantity of narcotic goods, thought to be 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy, into Australia by courier from London. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the information concerned an unknown quantity of narcotics goods, thought to be MDMA;
  • the trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • information had been received which suggested that the suspected courier was part of a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the person involved in this importation is likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation: The suspect was searched by members of the Australian Customs Service on her return to Australia. The search proved negative. As a result the controlled operation was not carried out. The certificate expired on 31 January 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

NR5/97
Date of Application: 27 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were to be imported into Australia without the participation of law enforcement officers. However, the Australian Federal Police had prior knowledge that the importation may occur and the certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to observe and allow the narcotic goods to pass to the intended recipient unimpeded to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity of cannabis into Australia from Papua New Guinea. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the information concerned a trafficable quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the persons may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the offenders are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.
  • In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.
Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation did not proceed. The certificate expired on 26 April 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

NR6/97
Date of Application: 30 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods which are the subject of the controlled operation were imported into Australia with the participation of law enforcement officers. The certificate authorising the controlled operation was issued in order to permit the law enforcement officers to engage in conduct which would constitute a narcotic goods offence without there being a certificate in force, and to obtain evidence of an offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the possible importation of a commercial quantity of cannabis into Australia. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the information concerned a commercial quantity of cannabis under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such period as the Court thinks fit;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the persons may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the offenders would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

The controlled operation was conducted and resulted in the arrest of a number of persons.

The narcotic goods are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs Policy and Procedures guidelines.

 

Exclusion of Information: The names of the persons arrested as a result of this controlled operation have been excluded pursuant to section 15T(4)(b) on the grounds that publishing the offenders names may prejudice an ongoing AFP investigation.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR1/96
Date of Application: 17 July 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain approximately 60 gms of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the source country was unusual and indicated a possible new source of the narcotic goods;
  • the targeted address was known to police;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the person would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901 whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 19 July 1996, Australian Federal Police members conducted a controlled operation and delivered the package (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). Shortly after delivery the recipient departed the premises. His vehicle was intercepted by police. A search failed to locate any narcotics goods and the driver was returned to his premises where a search warrant was executed. The controlled sample was recovered unopened. Due to lack of evidence, no charges have been laid. The narcotic goods have been destroyed.

 

[ table of contents ]


 

SR2/96
Date of Application: 23 July 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers. However, the certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to attempt to purchase a quantity of narcotic goods to obtain evidence and intelligence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901 which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

The investigation involved the proposed purchase of one kilogram of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the proposed purchase concerned a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions provided an opinion that the issuing of a certificate was necessary; and
  • the person was believed to be involved in a major drug operation.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation A controlled operation was not undertaken. The certificate expired on 21 August 1996.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR3/96
Date of Application: 11 October 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers inspected a consignment which was found to contain approximately 26 kilograms of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person was believed to be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the person could be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 12 October 1996, Australian Federal Police (AFP) and National Crime Authority members conducted a controlled operation and delivered the consignment (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted) to the consignee. The consignment was accepted and later collected by two other persons and taken to different premises. A search warrant was executed and the controlled operation sample was recovered.

The operation resulted in the arrest of Derek Alan Bowhay, Phillip Ng and Wai Man Li. All three have been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901. All three have been committed for trial.

The operation involved the actual seizure of 23.7 kilograms of heroin. Following discussions with DPP the drugs are being retained for prosecution purposes. The heroin is currently under secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR4/96
Date of Application: 11 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which was found to contain
1066 grams of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the person may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the person could be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 13 December 1996, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). The package was accepted by a person who conveyed it to other premises.

On 14 December 1996, a search warrant was executed and the package was found unopened.

As a result of further enquires David Bryn Masters has been charged and committed to stand trial for offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The operation involved the importation of 1066 grams of MDMA. The bulk of the drugs have been destroyed. A representative sample has been retained for prosecution of this matter. It is currently being held in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR5/96
Date of Application: 30 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers examined the contents of a satchel which was found to contain 565 grams (1998 tablets) of 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the satchel contained a trafficable quantity (0.5 grams) of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • the persons were known to police;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the persons may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the persons would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 31 December 1996, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation and delivered the satchel (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). A short time later AFP members entered the premises under warrant and the satchel was recovered. Although the outer packaging had been opened and resealed, the inner sections which contained the narcotic goods remained sealed. The package had been marked ‘Not known at this address’. A statement denying ownership was taken.

The operation involved the importation of 565 grams of MDMA which has been destroyed.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR1/97
Date of Application: 23 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers searched the luggage of two incoming British couriers at Tullamarine Airport and located 7.46 kilograms of tablets which were found to be 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as MDMA or ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the luggage contained a commercial quantity of MDMA under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life or for such a period as the Court thinks appropriate;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the persons may be involved in a major drug operation; and
  • if not apprehended, the persons would be likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 25 February 1997, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). Following a number telephone contact between the two British couriers and members of the Australian syndicate the drugs were collected from a Melbourne Hotel.

As a result of further enquiries seven people were subsequently arrested. Vanessa Louise McDonald, Louise Ann Burson, Danyon James Greig, David Campbell, Carl James Carey and Mary Prendergast were arrested and charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901. Charges against a seventh person have been withdrawn.

This operation involved the importation of 7.46 kilograms of MDMA. The drugs have been retained for prosecution purposes. They are currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP Drug-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR2/97
Date of Application: 30 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers searched an incoming Nepalese national suspected of carrying heroin internally. He consented to an x-ray examination and was found to have swallowed 452.6 grams of heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the consignment contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie physical and electronic surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • Thapa may be involved in a major drug operation and his activities to date are likely to be connected to the activities of a significant syndicate involved in the importation and distribution of drugs in Australia; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, they are likely to commit further offences under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

After passing the pellets of heroin, the Nepalese national was conveyed to a Melbourne Hotel where he was kept under police custody. Following a number of telephone conversations, Qu Fei Feng, Huy Bao Huynh, Stephen Zade Abbott and another person attended Thapa’s room on 3 June 1997 and took possession of the heroin. They were arrested by police as they departed the room.

Qu Fei Feng, Huy Bao Huynh and Stephen Zade Abbott have been charged and committed for trial for offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901. Charges were withdrawn against a fourth person. The Nepalese national is currently in protective custody.

This operation involved the importation of 452.6 grams of heroin. The drugs have been retained for prosecution of this matter. They are currently in secure storage in accordance with Australian Federal Police Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


 

SR3/97
Date of Application: 10 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation:

The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.

 

Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted packages forwarded to Australia from Cambodia which were found to contain heroin. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the packages contained a trafficable quantity of heroin under the Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the nature of the importation;
  • the increasing significance of Cambodia as a source country for drugs destined for the Australian market; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the person/s involved in this importation are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

 

Conduct of Operation:

On 11 June 1997, Australian Federal Police (AFP) members conducted a controlled operation (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted). The reconstructed packages were delivered to the intended address in Dandenong, Victoria. Shortly after delivery, three male persons were observed leaving the premises and travelling to premises located in North Dandenong.

Search warrants were executed on both premises. A search of the Dandenong premises located the outer wrappings of the packages. A search of the North Dandenong premises located the heroin consignment secreted behind a refrigerator in a shed at the rear of the premises.

As a result of the controlled operation Kho Iv, Sambo Bun and Pen He have been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901.

The 309 grams of heroin involved in this importation is being retained for prosecution purposes. It is currently in secure storage in accordance with AFP drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


SR4/97
Date of Application: 24 June 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The narcotic goods, subject of the controlled operation, were imported into Australia without the knowledge or participation of law enforcement officers and were seized by Customs on entry. The certificate was issued to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of the commission of a narcotic goods offence against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of the narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Customs officers intercepted a package which had been forwarded to Australia from the United Kingdom. The package was consigned to an address in Camberwell, Victoria. The package was found to contain 198 tablets of
3, 4-Methylenedioxyethylamphetamine, also known as MDEA or ecstasy. The authorising officer based his decision to issue the certificate on the following information:

  • the package contained a trafficable quantity of MDEA under the
    Customs Act 1901, the illegal importation of which attracts a maximum penalty of $100,000 or 25 years imprisonment or both;
  • when utilised in conjunction with traditional methods of investigation
    (ie physical and electronic surveillance, search warrant), conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence;
  • the increasing significance of the United Kingdom as a transhipment country for MDEA destined for the Australian market; and
  • if not identified and apprehended, the offender/s are likely to commit an offence under the Customs Act 1901, whether or not the operation took place.

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation:

On 28 June 1997 a resident of the Camberwell address attended Camberwell Post Office and took possession of the consignment, (which consisted of a representative sample of the narcotic goods, the remainder of which had been substituted), and returned to the target address. A short time later this person departed the premises in possession of the consignment and travelled to premises located in Eltham, Victoria.

Through the use of surveillance it was ascertained that the consignment had been opened. As a result police entered the premises. At the time of entry Jason Walker Rennie threw the controlled operation consignment out of a window and attempted to flee. The opened controlled operation consignment was retrieved from the rear yard of the premises.

Rennie has been charged with offences under section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, section 73(1) and 71(1) of the Drugs Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 and section 64(1) of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979.

This operation involved the importation of 198 MDEA tablets. The drugs have been retained for prosecution purposes. They are currently in secure storage according to Australian Federal Police Drugs-Policy and Procedures guidelines.

[ table of contents ]


APPLICATIONS FOR A CERTIFICATE AUTHORISING A CONTROLLED OPERATION


Certificates Issued by Senior Officers of the NCA

SNCA 1/96
Date of Application: 15 November 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation
Nature of Controlled Operation: The controlled operation was not carried out
Reason for Decision:

Information was received from a reliable informant concerning the use of the Australian Postal System to import cocaine into Australia by a Colombian syndicate. A number of parcels from South America containing protective covers for magazines which were impregnated with cocaine in gelatin form were intercepted. This new and sophisticated method of cocaine importation required specialised expertise to extract the cocaine. Fifteen packages were initially intercepted. Twenty further packages were expected. Arrangements were made in Colombia for a "chemist" to travel to Australia to extract the cocaine

  • the quantity of cocaine involved was a commercial quantity conservatively estimated to be a total of 7 kilograms. Further importations were expected.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the target was believed to be involved in a major drug importation
  • if not apprehended, the person would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The certificate expired before the operation could be carried out.

[ table of contents ]


 

SNCA 2/96
Date of Application: 13 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation
Nature of Controlled Operation: The certificate was issued (after the expiration of one previous certificate) to permit law enforcement officers to conduct investigations essential to gain evidence of offences against section 233B of the Customs Act 1901, by allowing the movement of narcotic goods from Customs control to the intended recipient which, in the absence of a certificate, may have constituted a narcotic goods offence.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received from a reliable informant concerning the use of the Australian Postal System to import cocaine into Australia by a Colombian syndicate. A number of parcels from South America containing protective covers for magazines which were impregnated with cocaine in gelatin form were intercepted. This new and sophisticated method of cocaine importation required specialised expertise to extract the cocaine. Fifteen packages were initially intercepted. Twenty further packages were expected. Arrangements were made in Colombia for a "chemist" to travel to Australia to extract the cocaine.

  • the quantity of cocaine involved was a commercial quantity conservatively estimated to be a total of 7 kilograms. Further importations were expected.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the target was believed to be involved in a major drug operation
  • if not apprehended, the person would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The operation involved the co-ordinated effort of the NCA, AFP and NSW Police. The "chemist" and others were placed under observation and a clandestine drug laboratory was located. On 22 December, 1996, whilst the chemical extraction of cocaine was taking place, a number of persons were arrested. Jorge Romero-Cepeda was charged with possession of a prohibited import contrary to section 233B(1)(ca) Customs Act 1901 and supply not less than a commercial quantity of prohibited drug contrary to sections 25(2) and 29 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW); Douglas Alan Robertson with possession of a prohibited import and supply not less than a commercial quantity of prohibited drug; Campo Elia-Reinoso with possession of a prohibited import, conspiracy to import a prohibited import and supply not less than a commercial quantity of prohibited drug. Gail Michelle Bazley was charged with supply not less than a commercial quantity of prohibited drug, however the charges were withdrawn by the Director of Public Prosecution. A warrant for the arrest of another person involved in the importation has been issued.

[ table of contents ]


 

SNCA 3/96
Date of Application: 13 December 1996
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation
Nature of Controlled Operation: The controlled operation was not carried out
Reason for Decision:

During the course of an investigation of a conspiracy to import cocaine, physical and electronic surveillance disclosed that one of the targets and another Sydney resident and known drug dealer were arranging a separate importation of cocaine being air-freighted from the United States to Australia.

  • the quantity of cocaine involved was a commercial quantity estimated to be 3 kilograms.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the targets were believed to be involved in a major drug importation
  • if not apprehended, the person would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The package containing the cocaine was diverted from the United States to another destination and no importation into Australia took place.

[ table of contents ]


 

SNCA 1/97
Date of Application: 23 January 1997.
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: A controlled operation was not carried out.
Reason for Decision:

Information was received concerning the availability of block heroin from persons associated with an Asian Narcotic syndicate and an importation of a large commercial quantity of heroin from Thailand using sophisticated techniques, including the use of consular property. An undercover operative was advised of 120 kilograms which was ready for shipment. He was supplied with a sample of heroin and advised of a five kilogram test run to be followed up by further shipments of seventy kilograms at a time

  • the quantity of heroin initially involved was a commercial quantity conservatively estimated to be a total of 120 kilograms.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the target was believed to be involved in a major drug operation
  • if not apprehended, the person would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: An importation did not take place during the currency of the certificate. However, the investigation continued and further certificates were issued.

[ table of contents ]


 

SNCA 2/97
Date of Application: 24 February 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation
Nature of Controlled Operation: A controlled operation was not carried out
Reason for Decision:

A further certificate was issued after the expiration of certificate SNCA 1/1997. Contact was maintained between the undercover operative and the targets of the investigation. The targets then planned to import 3 to 5 kilograms of heroin to finance a larger importation of 100 kilograms.

  • the quantity of heroin involved was a commercial quantity conservatively estimated to be a total of 100 kilograms. Further importations were anticipated.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the targets were believed to be involved in a major drug importation
  • if not apprehended, these persons would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The activities of the targets were monitored by an undercover operative and further targets were identified. One of the targets travelled to Thailand to arrange an immediate importation of 4 kilograms of heroin which was in addition to the planned 100 kilograms. Another person introduced to the undercover operative discussed supplying him with heroin and was charged with a State offence. Evidence was obtained and upon return of the target Feleti Bott from Thailand (without drugs), he and Ivan Depaoli were charged with conspiracy to import heroin contrary to section 233B(1)(cb) of the Customs Act. Depaoli was also charged with two offences of supply heroin contrary to section 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and was further charged jointly with Hoai Niem Luu with supply heroin. A warrant has been issued for the arrest of a fourth target who left Australia on 16 January, 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

SNCA 3/97
Date of Application: 20 March 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation
Nature of Controlled Operation: A controlled operation was not carried out
Reason for Decision:

A controlled operation certificate SNCA 2/1997 had been issued in respect of a number of targets to import heroin. One of the targets travelled to Thailand to bring back a specific importation of 4 kilograms of heroin.

  • the quantity of heroin involved was a commercial quantity (4 kilograms) of heroin. Further importations were planned.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of persons for such an offence.
  • the targets were believed to be involved in a major drug importation
  • if not apprehended, these persons would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation. A separate certificate for this isolated importation was issued for more abundant caution.

Conduct of Operation: The activities of the targets were monitored by an undercover operative and contact was maintained with one target who had travelled to Thailand to arrange a 4 kilogram importation of heroin. Evidence was obtained and upon return of the target Feleti Bott from Thailand, he was arrested along with Ivan Depaoli. Both were charged with conspiracy to import heroin contrary to section 233B(1)(cb) of the Customs Act. Depaoli was also charged with two offences of supply heroin contrary to section 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and further charged jointly with Hoai Niem Luu with supply heroin. A warrant has been issued for the arrest of a fourth target who left Australia on 16 January, 1997.

[ table of contents ]


 

SNCA 4/97
Date of Application: 2 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The controlled operation was not carried out.
Reason for Decision:

A planned importation of cocaine of between 140 and 280 kilograms of high grade cocaine was detected and a joint Commonwealth/State Task Force was formed.

  • the quantity of cocaine involved was a commercial quantity of between 140 and 280 kilograms was significant and further shipments were planned
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the target was believed to be involved in a major drug importation
  • if not apprehended, the person would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: The controlled operation was not carried out. However, the investigation is continuing.

[ table of contents ]


 

PNCA 1/97
Date of Application: 3 May 1997
Decision Taken: To authorise a controlled operation.
Nature of Controlled Operation: The controlled operation was not carried out.
Reason for Decision:

A joint NCA, AFP and WAPOL operation targeted a Chinese national who arrived at Perth International Airport in possession of maps and other documents relating to movement of shipping and he was suspected of involvement in the importation of heroin. Advice was sought from the DPP who considered that a certificate was not necessary in this particular case. However, Customs considered it appropriate to withhold the issue of an Exemption from Customs’ Scrutiny Certificate until a certificate was issued. The Member issued the certificate after considering these matters and:

  • the nature of the drug involved, namely heroin, and although the quantity was unknown, it was likely to be significant if imported by ship.
  • when utilised with other traditional methods of investigation, conducting a controlled operation would make it much easier to obtain evidence that could lead to the prosecution of the person for such an offence.
  • the target was believed to be involved in a major drug importation
  • if not apprehended, the person would commit an offence under the Customs Act, whether or not the operation took place

In view of the above, the authorising officer considered the criminal activities were sufficiently serious to warrant the issue of a certificate authorising the controlled operation.

Conduct of Operation: No narcotic substances were found nor drug offences detected. However, the target was arrested and charged with two offences of harbouring an unlawful non-citizen under the Migration Act 1958. Two unlawful non-citizens were detained and deported back to China. An infringement notice under section 230 of the Migration Act was served on the shipping agent imposing a $10,000 fine per illegal entrant, plus all other costs involved with their detention, accommodation and removal. This penalty and costs will in turn be passed to the owner of the vessel.

[ table of contents ]