Missing US $50 million corruption case |05 February 2022
Prosecution submits partial disclosed evidence materials to defence teams
Defence attorneys in the case of the missing US $50 million donated to Seychelles in 2002 by the Abu Dhabi government, yesterday received part of the disclosed evidence from the Anti-Corruption Commission of Seychelles to start preparing their defence.
During the hearing, a provisional plea date – March 4 – was also set, subject to change.
Over 6,000 soft copies of documents in Adobe and WAV format were given to lawyers Basil Hoareau who is representing Leslie Benoiton, Maurice Loustau-Lalanne and Lekha Nair; Daniel Cesar who is representing Sarah Rene, and France Bonte who is representing Mukesh Valabhji, while the rest of the documents will be provided within the next 30 days.
During yesterday’s session, Laura Valabhji was standing her own defence.
According to Mr Bonté, due to the fact that the disclosed evidence are in electronic form (on pen drives) and that he will have to work with his client wherever he is, he will need to bring along a computer.
To this, Anthony Juliette who is representing the Anti-Corruption Commission of Seychelles (ACCS) noted that they have no problem with that, as long as certain conditions are observed.
These include, a new laptop computer without Wi-Fi, the wireless technology used to connect computers, tablets, smart phones and other devices to the internet. The computer would be used exclusively for the purpose of preparing the case based on the evidence provided on the pen drives, it will be constantly monitored, verified by the technical unit of the police, or the ACCS, ensuring that it has not been contaminated, or misused in any way.
Mr Bonté also made an application, stating that since the case of the first and second accused are having joint defence, they would need, at some point, to be together with their lawyers to work on their defence.
To that, Mr Juliette noted that it is beyond the control of the ACCS, but however noted that at both facilities where the accused are being remanded – Montagne Posée Prison and the Takamaka (Quatre Bornes) police station – there are facilities provided by the remand authorities and the police, allowing the accused to see their lawyers.
He added that the main difficulty in Mr Bonté’s request is that they be in the same place, at the same time for him to conduct his work.
This, he said, the ACCS cannot have any input since it does not have any control on how the authorities deal with those matters.
He also noted that the ACCS does not have any objection, since fair trial demands that the accused person understands the evidence against him or her, and must be able to go over and prepare the evidence with the assistance of his or her lawyer.
The logistic of it, however, is well beyond the capabilities of the ACCS, and remains to the court and the concerned authorities.
Representing Leslie Benoiton, Maurice Loustau-Lalanne and Lekha Nair, attorney Basil Hoareau noted that since the accused persons need to understand the nature and context of the case brought against them by the ACCS, it will be good that the ACCS provides them with the hard copy of the evidence to facilitate their work.
The court pointed out that electronic materials would be sufficient, provided that the same are produced during the trial and no alterations are made, but in view of the counsels’ submissions, the court ordered that maximum possible documents provided by the ACCS be in physical form.
Mr Hoareau also negotiated for the bail condition of Mr Loustau-Lalanne whereby he has to present himself at the Mont Fleuri police station on a daily basis.
Mr Hoareau requested that this becomes a weekly obligation, instead of daily.
Chief Justice Govinden approved the request, following no objections from the ACCS.
Regarding the request for hard copies of evidence, Mr Juliette noted that as time and resources are limited and very stretched, they will however, as much as they can to paginate the documents, but do not undertake fully that they will be able to provide hard copies of the 6,000 documents.
In his rulings, Chief Justice Govinden emphasised the right to a fair and public hearing under Article 19(2)(c) of the Constitution, which states that every person charged with an offence shall be given adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence to the charge.
Considering the large volume of materials supplied by the ACCS so far and yet to be produced to the accused persons, the court stated that it needs to exercise reasonableness and adopt balanced approach.
He allowed the Valabhji couple to meet while working on their joint defence. This will be done under strict monitoring of the authority, subject to the security arrangement and detention protocol, while the request of laptop computers for the first three suspects was also approved, provided that the part which provides the Wi-Fi component is removed.
As proposed by the ACCS, the laptops will be used for the sole purpose of preparation of the respective defences of the accused, while it will contain only applications that will go towards viewing and printing of the disclosed evidence.
Printing facilities will also be made available.
The six suspects in the case, namely Laura Valabhji (accused of money laundering and concealment of property), Mukesh Valabhji (accused of conspiracy to commit official corruption, two counts of conspiracy to commit money laundering, money laundering, several counts for stealing and official corruption charges and concealment of property), Leslie Benoiton (accused of official corruption, money laundering charges, concealment of property, and stealing by person in public service), Sarah Rene (accused of money laundering and concealment of property), Maurice Loustau-Lalanne (accused of corruptly approving the devaluation of three hotels and to enable such properties to be purchased by the first accused at a price lower than the true and proper value of such properties – official corruption and two counts of stealing), and Lekha Nair (accused of corruption and aiding and abetting theft), will reappear before the court on February 18.
Roland Duval