The High Court has reserved judgment in the case of two Mafia-linked drug traffickers jailed for the importation of a record ecstasy shipment.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Drug kingpin Pasquale Barbaro and his cousin Saverio Zirilli were jailed last year over the shipment of 15 million tablets, or 4.4 tonnes, of ecstasy and 100 kilograms of cocaine.
The drugs were packed inside 3000 tomato tins and shipped from Naples to Melbourne in June 2007. Police seized the drugs, estimated to be worth $440 million, after Melbourne customs officials X-rayed the tins and discovered ''image anomalies''.
The men reached an agreement with the prosecution to plead guilty in the Victoria Supreme Court to trafficking and conspiring to traffic ecstasy and attempting to possess cocaine. The terms of the deal required the men to plead and the Crown to submit a sentence range to the court.
The prosecution planned to advocate a range of 32 to 37 years jail for Barbaro, with a non-parole period of 24 to 28 years. Zirilli's suggested jail term was to be 21 to 25 years imprisonment, with a minimum of 16 to 19 years.
However, Justice Betty King refused to hear the submission and sentenced Barbaro to life in prison with a 30-year non-parole period and Zirilli to 26 years with an 18-year minimum.
The High Court was asked to consider whether Justice King's refusal to hear the Crown submission was a breach of procedural fairness and a failure to take into account a relevant consideration.
In August last year, Victoria's Court of Appeal rejected a bid by the pair to have their sentences reduced.
The court found Justice King had committed no error of law in refusing to hear the sentencing submissions.
On Wednesday, Barbaro’s lawyer, Stephen Odgers SC, said his client had pleaded on the incentive of the proposed sentence range.
Mr Odgers argued the Crown had crafted the range after careful deliberation and the judge was obliged to hear the submission.
He said the judge had ignored procedure and may have imposed a lower sentence had it been presented in court.
But the respondent, Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Robert Bromwich SC, said the judge did not have to take the submissions into account.