JUDGMENTS

[Crime – Multiple criminal breach of trust (s.405 Penal Code Cap.22) and money laundering (s.3(1)(a)(b)(c) Criminal Assets Recovery Order 2012) offences by two public servants (husband and wife) in Brunei Judiciary involving $15.75 million – Appeals against convictions on 25 charges (1st appellant) and 6 charges (2nd appellant) dismissed. Unsuccessful grounds included – test for recusal of trial judge – stay for abuse of process – good character direction – complaint that judge “entered the arena” – consideration of s.177(3) Evidence Act – s.34 Penal Code – ss 370, 371 Criminal Procedure Code, –

Sentence – Appeal by Public Prosecutor against sentences of 10 years imprisonment (1st appellant) and 5 years imprisonment (2nd appellant) allowed – trial judge’s order that all sentences be served concurrently wrong in principle – partly consecutive sentences substituted – 10 years increased to 15 years (1st appellant) and 5 years increased to 7 years 6 months (2nd appellant) – relevant considerations – multiple offences, public interest, multiple victims, amount of money misappropriated, time span of overall criminality (over 10 years), principle of totality, prosecution appeal discount applied. Public Prosecutor’s appeal against acquittals on two charges of money laundering by 2nd appellant dismissed.]

[Crime – Multiple criminal breach of trust (s.405 Penal Code Cap.22) and money laundering (s.3(1)(a)(b)(c) Criminal Assets Recovery Order 2012) offences by two public servants (husband and wife) in Brunei Judiciary involving $15.75 million – Appeals against convictions on 25 charges (1 st appellant) and 6 charges (2nd appellant) dismissed. Unsuccessful grounds included – test for recusal of trial judge – stay for abuse of process – good character direction – complaint that judge “entered the arena” – consideration of s.177(3) Evidence Act – s.34 Penal Code – ss 370, 371 Criminal Procedure Code, –

Sentence – Appeal by Public Prosecutor against sentences of 10 years imprisonment (1st appellant) and 5 years imprisonment (2nd appellant) allowed – trial judge’s order that all sentences be served concurrently wrong in principle – partly consecutive sentences substituted – 10 years increased to 15 years (1 st appellant) and 5 years increased to 7 years 6 months (2nd appellant) – relevant considerations – multiple offences, public interest, multiple victims, amount of money misappropriated, time span of overall criminality (over 10 years), principle of totality, prosecution appeal discount applied.
Public Prosecutor’s appeal against acquittals on two charges of money laundering by 2nd appellant dismissed]