Customs conviction and moral turpitude: possession of foreign goods without clearance documents did not justify automatic termination.

A conviction for possessing foreign goods without customs clearance documents under the Customs Act does not automatically amount to an offence involving moral turpitude. Moral turpitude is conduct that brings shame and may justify employment disqualification, but a conviction alone is insufficient; the nature of the conduct must show that character. On the stated facts, possession of a V.C.R. and video camera without the required customs documents was held not to involve moral turpitude. The consequence was that the conviction, by itself, could not support automatic termination of service, and the revision was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether conviction under Sections 135(1)(b)(i) and 135(1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act for possession of foreign goods without customs clearance documents involves moral turpitude so as to affect employment consequences.

Analysis: Moral turpitude refers to conduct that brings shame on the person guilty of it and may justify employment disqualification. A mere conviction does not automatically amount to an offence involving moral turpitude. On the facts, the accused could not produce customs clearance certificates for the V.C.R. and video camera, and possession of those articles without the requisite customs documents was held not to be an offence involving moral turpitude.

Conclusion: The offence did not involve moral turpitude, and the conviction could not by itself found automatic termination of service; the revision was dismissed.

---