The Case
 
Youseff Hamze was subjected to a Firearms Prohibition Order (FPO), a powerful legal mechanism that allows NSW Police to conduct searches of a person, their vehicle and premises without first obtaining a search warrant.
According to reporting by The Sydney Morning Herald, Mr Hamze was repeatedly stopped and searched while the FPO remained in force.
His solicitor, Fadi Abbas, challenged the order on the basis that Mr Hamze was a fit and proper person and that the FPO should not have been imposed against him.
 
The Firearms Prohibition Order
Firearms Prohibition Orders are designed to prevent individuals considered unsuitable to possess firearms from accessing guns, firearm parts and ammunition.
Following legislative reforms in NSW, police were given significant additional powers in relation to people subject to FPOs, including the ability to conduct warrantless searches.
Between 2014 and 2015, the number of FPOs issued by NSW Police increased by more than 200%, rising from just over 250 orders in 2014 to approximately 520 in 2015.
Police described the increased use of FPOs as part of a deliberate strategy aimed at disrupting serious criminal activity and gun-related violence.

The Reality of the Case
Mr Hamze's experience demonstrated the significant impact that a Firearms Prohibition Order can have on an individual.
During the period in which he was subject to the order:

• his vehicle and premises were repeatedly searched by police

• searches were conducted more than five times a week during certain periods

• no adverse findings were made against him during those searches

• the FPO was ultimately challenged on his behalf

The challenge focused on whether Mr Hamze was properly considered an unsuitable person to possess a firearm.

Our Defence Strategy
Fadi Abbas acted for Mr Hamze in challenging the Firearms Prohibition Order.
The defence position was that Mr Hamze was a fit and proper person and that the order imposed against him was not justified.
The challenge required scrutiny of the basis upon which the FPO had been issued and the circumstances of the individual subject to the order.
In matters involving Firearms Prohibition Orders, important legal considerations can include:

• examining the information relied upon when the order was issued

• challenging whether the individual should properly be subject to an FPO

• considering the legality and circumstances of searches conducted under FPO powers

• protecting the client's rights when significant police powers are being exercised

• seeking review of an order where there are grounds to challenge it
   

The Result
The challenge to Mr Hamze's Firearms Prohibition Order was successful.
As Fadi Abbas explained in reporting at the time, the argument advanced on behalf of Mr Hamze was that he was a fit and proper person.
The delegate agreed with that position.
This was significant given the extent to which the order had affected Mr Hamze while it remained in force, including repeated searches of his premises and vehicle without adverse findings.
The Broader Issue
Mr Hamze's case occurred during a period of significant expansion in the use of Firearms Prohibition Orders across NSW.
A NSW Ombudsman review examined the operation of the expanded FPO search powers and found that, during its two-year review period:

• more than 2,500 searches were conducted using FPO search powers

• 35 firearms were seized

• firearms, firearm parts or ammunition were located in approximately 2% of FPO searches

• more than 200 people who were not themselves subject to FPOs were searched in circumstances the Ombudsman identified as potentially unlawful

The NSW Bar Association also raised concerns about the breadth of the regime, including the information that could be relied upon when deciding whether to issue an FPO.
These issues demonstrate the importance of ensuring that extraordinary police powers remain subject to appropriate legal scrutiny.
Why This Case Matters
Firearms Prohibition Orders give police substantial powers that can significantly affect a person's privacy and everyday life.
Mr Hamze's case demonstrates that:

• a Firearms Prohibition Order can be challenged

• the basis upon which an FPO was issued can be scrutinised

• repeated police searches do not necessarily establish wrongdoing

• individuals affected by an FPO may have legal avenues available to challenge the order

The existence of extensive police powers does not remove an individual's right to obtain legal advice and challenge the legal basis for action taken against them.

Our Expertise
At Abbas & Co Lawyers, we act for clients in serious criminal and firearms-related matters, including:

• Firearms Prohibition Orders

• firearms offences

• police searches

• challenges involving the exercise of police powers

• serious criminal investigations

• defended criminal proceedings

We know how to:

• scrutinise the basis of police action

• challenge Firearms Prohibition Orders where appropriate

• protect our clients' rights during investigations and searches

• provide strategic representation in complex criminal law matters

Speak to Us
If you have been issued with a Firearms Prohibition Order or are facing repeated searches or other action by police, obtaining legal advice can help you understand your rights and available options.
An FPO can have significant consequences, but its issue does not necessarily mean it cannot be challenged.
Contact Abbas & Co Lawyers to discuss your circumstances and the legal options available to you.