Legal and other challenges posed to investigators and prosecutors in pursuing the offence of conspiracy to deal in drugs

Abstract

The ultimate goal of law enforcement agencies in respect of investigations into drug trafficking, should not stop at seizing the prohibited substance, but more importantly that of dismantling organised criminal groups through effective imprisonment terms fitting the crime and the circumstances of the case. This can only be achieved if all the members of the conspiracy are identified, prosecuted and found guilty. Half-baked investigations would make it possible for the main co-conspirators to continue to enjoy and benefit from the proceeds of their illicit activity. This is a basic rule for law enforcement agencies. The basic meaning of a conspiracy is essentially an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime. It is an agreement in contemplation of future conduct, and gives rise to criminal responsibility by reason of a person's intention. The intention which is penalised in this offence ought to be in itself criminal. Nonetheless, there are a number of essential requirements that must be satisfied so that a defendant can be convicted of the offence of conspiracy. In proving the essential elements, a number of issues are however faced by police investigators at every stage of the investigation and by prosecutors alike during court proceedings. In the course of the research conducted for the purposes of this study, the author has come across a number of issues which were raised during the trial of specific cases of particular importance and which have influenced the outcome of the case. Moreover, flaws in the laws regulating drugs have been identified; basically provisions which have been enacted in the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, however inadvertently have been excluded from the text of the Medical and Kindred Professions Ordinance. Other provisions which have been declared as unconstitutional still appear in the text of the two laws.