latest | 

Michael Lynn associate challenges prosecution arising from money laundering probe

‘We say that somebody shouldn’t be subjected to a prosecution for something which is not an offence’

Yesterday at 14:15

A man charged in connection with a money laundering investigation into the activities of rogue ex-solicitor and property developer Michael Lynn is taking a legal challenge against his prosecution.

Bulgarian national Yavor Poptoshev (48) was given leave by the High Court today to bring judicial review proceedings against the DPP and the Garda Commissioner.

He is challenging his prosecution for refusing to disclose the passwords to three electronic devices seized by gardaí during a raid on his home.

The High Court heard that lawyers for Mr Poptoshev will argue that the power to compel someone to disclose passwords during a search is a disproportion interference with the privilege against self-incrimination.

Gardaí seized a Google Pixel 4 mobile phone, a Google Pixel 6 mobile phone and an Asus laptop during a search of Mr Poptoshev’s apartment at St Raphaela’s Road, Stillorgan, Dublin on January 9.

He was subsequently charged with obstructing a garda by refusing to disclose the passwords for the devices, contrary to Section 49 (1) of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001.

Mr Poptoshev appeared before Dun Laoghaire District Court on February 6.

The summary offence is punishable by a fine and up to six months in prison.

An application for leave to bring judicial review proceedings, challenging the constitutionality of the offence and the power to compel the disclosure of device passwords, was granted on an ex parte, or one side only, basis by Ms Justice Niamh Hyland.

Mark Lynam SC, for Mr Poptoshev, told the court his client was a friend of Michael Lynn and had assisted “in sifting through a vast volume of disclosure” in the recent criminal case against the struck off ex-solicitor.

Lynn was jailed for five and a half years in February for stealing €17.9m from six financial institutions by taking out multiple mortgages on the same property.

Mr Lynam, who appeared instructed by Mulholland Law, said gardaí had “burst” into the home of his client, who he said had no previous convictions.

Mr Poptoshev declined to provide passwords at his home and asked to speak to a solicitor.

Mr Lynam said Mr Poptoshev was arrested and eventually spoke to his solicitor in the garda station.

The court heard the solicitor spoke to gardaí and asked that the “parameters” of what was being searched for be outlined before the provision of the passwords.

n my submission, the power to compel someone to do that during a search is a disproportion interference with the privilege against self-incrimination,” said Mr Lynam.

“Mr Poptoshev is a suspect for offences being investigated by An Garda Síochána, which are set out in affidavit. It relates to a money laundering investigation.”

Mr Lynam said his client had legitimate reasons not to hand over his passwords straight away. He said there was a lot of legally privileged documentation on the devices.

The barrister said his client’s position was that the “purported criminal offence” was unconstitutional and disproportionate and that caselaw from the European Court of Human Rights would support this.

“What those cases indicate is where a person is compelled to hand over documents which would tend to incriminate them, that is a breach of Article 6 of the Convention,” he said.

“We say that if it is the case this law applies to smartphones, then it is invalid by being too vague because a person seeking legal advice couldn’t be sure what it was he had to hand over.”

As part of the proceedings, Mr Poptoshev is seeking a stay on his prosecution until his challenge is decided.

Ms Justice Hyland granted leave and made the case returnable to a date next month. No stay was placed on the prosecution.

In the civil action, Mr Poptoshev says has lived in Ireland for 18 months but had known Lynn for 14 or 15 years and had worked with him on building projects in several countries, including Portugal, Hungary and Slovakia.

The court heard that while there had been academic commentary on the issue, there had been no previous constitutional challenge dealing specifically with the provision of a password.