Add Category
Updated
Two Australian men, including the father of a notorious Islamic State fighter, allegedly paid a $US1 million bribe to an Iraqi official when their construction contracts were at a "stalemate", a Sydney court has heard.
Mamdouh Elomar, the father of Mohamed Elomar, who was killed fighting with Islamic State in Iraq, and his brother Ibrahim are accused of paying the bribe to win contracts for their construction company, Lifese, in Iraq.
There is no suggestion Mamdouh Elomar's charges are linked to his son's association with the terrorist group.
Prosecutor Lincoln Crowley told Sydney Downing Centre Local Court that between March 2014 and February 2015, the Elomars became interested in securing contracts from the Iraqi Government.
The court heard Ibrahim Elomar had a series of meetings in Iraq with officials and industry representatives about several project contracts, such as a waste management facility in Baghdad.
The prosecution told the court Ibrahim Elomar signed a partnership contract, however the contract was initially not signed by Iraqi officials.
"It is alleged a $US1 million payment was expected before an endorsement and partnership agreement would take place," Mr Crowley told the court.
'No-one can point to where money went'
The court heard intercepted phone calls between the Elomars and an associate indicated a "stalemate" took place, where the Iraqi officials would not move forward without a "payment".
It is alleged Mahmoud Elomar then arranged for payment to be deposited for collection in Iraq, and the court heard shortly afterwards, the contract was signed in Iraq.
However, Greg James QC, who is representing both Mahmoud and Ibrahim Elomar told the court there was no evidence to support the charge, saying the fact a contract was signed was a significant point.
"That in itself indicates an unwillingness to proceed in a brown paper bag-type technique," he said.
He also said "no-one could point to where the money got to".
"We know not whether it is an unlawful payment ... but the crown's response to that is it does not matter."
'It does not matter who official was': prosecutor
The crown prosecutor argued it was not necessary to identify who the official was, referencing an amendment to section 70.2 of the Criminal Code which states a "person does not need to intend to influence a particular official".
However, Mr James argued the amendment had occurred after the alleged offence occurred, and therefore should not apply retrospectively.
"We deal with the act as it was at the time," he told the court.
He said there was no doubt the Elomars were in discussions with Iraqi officials, however, said there was no evidence to suggest anything illegal had occurred.
"If you can't tell who it was said to be influenced ... in what role ... whether they could or could not influence ... then you're unable to distinguish between the properly obtaining of business," Mr James said.
"In business the payment of fees upfront is not an indication of corruptness."
Topics: corruption, law-crime-and-justice, unrest-conflict-and-war, terrorism, sydney-2000, nsw
First posted