Peter Gray - Mauritius
"I am totally shattered with everything that has happened. I've gone through so much, all I'm thinking about is coming home to Australia." – Peter Gray
SUMMARY
Five years of hell might finally be over for Peter Gray, the Australian/British citizen arrested on suspicion of drugs-trafficking following a chance meeting with a woman on a flight from Bangkok to Mauritius in August 2005. However, despite the charges against Peter being dropped, his brother Tony feels this ordeal is still not over as Peter is yet to return to Australia:
"Five years of his life have been taken off him, but he's still over there - anything could happen." - Tony Gray
BACKGROUND
On 23 August 2005 during a flight to Mauritius to attend business meetings, Peter conversed with a woman on the plane and gave her his contact card. The day after he arrived on the island, police arrested Peter. The woman on the plane had been arrested carrying 1.8 kilos of heroin in her suitcase, and had implicated Peter in the crime.
Confinement
Mr Gray spent a traumatic 86 days in solitary confinement, which we believe qualifies as inhuman treatment, under a ‘provisional charge’ of drug importation. During this time Peter reports that the police used sleep deprivation methods.
Peter was held for 16 months in a maximum security prison, where he made multiple applications for bail. Magistrates repeatedly sanctioned Peter’s continued incarceration, despite no formal charges being pressed against him, allowing the police more time to investigate and gather evidence.
Hearings and Bail
Peter was finally granted bail in December 2006 subject to the condition that he must remain in Mauritius. Since then Peter has attended several further hearings, but a full trial has never commenced. Instead on each occasion the police were granted further time to gather evidence and a hearing was scheduled for a later date.
Peter was finally granted bail in December 2006 subject to the condition that he must remain in Mauritius. Since then Peter has attended several further hearings, but a full trial has never commenced. Instead on each occasion the police were granted further time to gather evidence and a hearing was scheduled for a later date.
On 30 June 2o08 Peter went to court with an embassy official to file a complaint that, while the woman he met on the plane had received a full trial and had been sentenced to 12 years imprisonment, Peter had been left to languish for 2 years 7 months without any formal charge being brought against him, let alone a full trial being held.
This resulted in a hearing on 4 July 2008 but the police failed to turn up and so were ordered to pay a fine. In response to this, the Mauritian police formally charged Mr Gray with importation of drugs on 5 July 2008.
The prosecution case against Peter was dealt a severe blow in court on 9 December 2008 when the chief witness (the woman Peter met on the plane) told the court that she had only incriminated Peter because the police told her to, and so refused to testify against him in the case.
On 19 February 2009, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions issued a notice discontinuing proceedings against Peter on the charge of importation of drugs. Unfortunately, the wording of the notice meant that Peter could still be tried on the same facts again, and so the police filed a new lesser charge of conspiracy to import heroin.
Charges Dropped
Justice was continuously delayed as the police failed to produce witnesses in court and were repeatedly granted further time to gather evidence. The charges against Peter were finally dropped following a hearing on 7 May 2010. This means that the prosecution authorities in Mauritius finally concluded that Peter should not be prosecuted. However, Peter has agreed to remain in Mauritius for a few weeks to provide a witness statement in the trial of other men said to have connections to the woman from the plane.
Charges Dropped
Justice was continuously delayed as the police failed to produce witnesses in court and were repeatedly granted further time to gather evidence. The charges against Peter were finally dropped following a hearing on 7 May 2010. This means that the prosecution authorities in Mauritius finally concluded that Peter should not be prosecuted. However, Peter has agreed to remain in Mauritius for a few weeks to provide a witness statement in the trial of other men said to have connections to the woman from the plane.
Passport Cancellation
Peter’s situation was also complicated by the actions of former Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, who had Mr Gray’s passport cancelled and replaced with an A4 piece of paper for identification. This was permitted under a controversial law which allows ministers to refuse to reissue a passport when the individual is accused of a serious offence abroad. Peter’s passport has recently been returned to him. However, over two months have passed since the charges were dropped against him and he is still unable to leave Mauritius.
"It was a real kick in the teeth. It's as alone as I've ever felt." - Peter Gray, on the cancellation of his passport.
CONCERNS OF FAIR TRIAL INTERNATIONAL
Fair Trials International has expressed serious concerns about the case:
· Delays and failure to conclude the case within a reasonable period of time: Peter was prevented from reuniting with his family in Australia for 5 years whilst the courts in Mauritius repeatedly gave the prosecution more time to gather evidence and call witnesses. This led to a restriction of Peter’s liberty for an unreasonably long period of time, before the courts finally made an order for the charges to be dropped due to lack of evidence.
· Prolonged imprisonment without charge: The police were able to hold Peter for months without formally charging him, instead issuing a ‘preliminary charge’ which could be dropped or changed without notice and ostensibly without producing evidence of Peter’s guilt. In addition, during his imprisonment Peter alleges that a halogen lamp was kept burning 24 hours a day during his 86 days in solitary confinement, which he says prevented him from falling asleep.
· Passport cancellation: Fair Trials International is concerned that Australian law allowed for a passport to be cancelled when Peter had not actually been found guilty; this appears to go against the presumption of innocence. It also seems Peter tried to reapply for a passport at one point, but he was told the A4 paper provided to him by the government was not sufficient to be used as identification, seemingly putting Peter in an impossible situation.