Al-Talebi was sentenced following conviction at trial to 2 counts of jointly attempting to provide support or resources to a terrorist organisation contrary to s 102.7(1), 11.1(1) and 11.2A(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code and 1 count of jointly attempting to make funds available to a terrorist organisation contrary to. Azari was sentenced following a plea of guilty to attempting to make funds available to Islamic State contrary to s 11.1(1) and 102.6(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code and sentenced following conviction at trial to 2 counts of attempting to make funds available to Islamic State contrary to s 11.1(1) and 102.6(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, and 1 count of participating in a telephone conversation contrary to s 101.6(1). Original sentence imposed on Al-Talebi 12 years imprisonment with a 9 year non-parole period and on Azari 18 years imprisonment with a 13 year and 6 month non-parole period. Al-Talebi appealed on the grounds of disparity and manifest excess. Azari appealed on the grounds that there was error in taking into account 16BA offences, manifest excess and disparity.
Section 16BA: No sentence is imposed for an offence listed on a s 16BA schedule. Specific deterrence and punishment can only be reflected in the sentence imposed for the offence of which an offender has been convicted and not for an offence where guilt has been admitted but for which the offender has not been committed. The sentence for the funding offence had already built into it an unquantified allowance for any uplift associated with the s 16BA offences. There is no indication that the s 16BA offences were taken into account again or that there was any aspect of double-counting in the approach taken by the sentencing judge.
Parity: There were substantial similarities between the roles played by Azari and Al-Talebi concerning the provision of funding. Both offenders were of prior good character. Neither was found to be remorseful or contrite. Generally, although not necessarily, the inclusion of offences on a s 16BA schedule will result in a higher overall offence. This makes comparison for parity purposes less helpful. The lower sentence for Azari may be explained by inclusion of the s 16BA offences on the schedule, rather than as separate charges on the indictment, and by Azari’s relative youth.
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.
Section 16BA: No sentence is imposed for an offence listed on a s 16BA schedule. Specific deterrence and punishment can only be reflected in the sentence imposed for the offence of which an offender has been convicted and not for an offence where guilt has been admitted but for which the offender has not been committed. The sentence for the funding offence had already built into it an unquantified allowance for any uplift associated with the s 16BA offences. There is no indication that the s 16BA offences were taken into account again or that there was any aspect of double-counting in the approach taken by the sentencing judge.
Parity: There were substantial similarities between the roles played by Azari and Al-Talebi concerning the provision of funding. Both offenders were of prior good character. Neither was found to be remorseful or contrite. Generally, although not necessarily, the inclusion of offences on a s 16BA schedule will result in a higher overall offence. This makes comparison for parity purposes less helpful. The lower sentence for Azari may be explained by inclusion of the s 16BA offences on the schedule, rather than as separate charges on the indictment, and by Azari’s relative youth.
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.
