Natural justice in customs inquiries requires cross-examination when ex parte witness statements support confiscation

In a quasi-judicial customs inquiry, reliance on ex parte witness statements requires an opportunity for cross-examination where those statements materially support confiscation. Refusing repeated requests to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were used against the affected party breached natural justice. The resulting confiscation order was therefore not sustainable and could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether refusal to permit cross-examination of witnesses whose statements were relied upon in a customs inquiry violated principles of natural justice and vitiated the confiscation order.

Analysis: The order of confiscation was founded in part on statements of several witnesses recorded ex parte. The affected party repeatedly sought an opportunity to cross-examine them, but the request was refused. In a quasi-judicial customs inquiry, denial of cross-examination of witnesses whose statements are relied upon, when those statements materially support the decision, constitutes a breach of natural justice.

Conclusion: The refusal to afford cross-examination was invalid, and the confiscation order could not stand.

---