BLADE1:
Do i then take their word for it? or can the pencil pusher behind the desk ignore responsability? and void SWIM's chance of pleading ignorant?
No you can't. Your mistake is one of law and not of fact. A mistake of law is not a defence - the old maxim, "ignorance of the law is no excuse". A mistake of fact is a defence to a criminal charge.
One of the more high profile decisions on this is the High Court case of
Ostrowski v Palmer [2004] HCA 30; 218 CLR 493.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2004/30.html?query=palmer%20and%20mistake%20of%20law
In this case a government representative told a lobster fisherman that he could fish in a certain area. The government representative was wrong. The fisherman was in the right area as explained by the representative but of course the question of whether he could fish there was a legal one. That is, is fishing in this particular area permitted or prohibited by law? It was prohibited and remained prohibited, even though the government lackey was wrong about that legal question.
Had the area been one in which it was legal to fish but the fisherman had positioned his boat in the incorrect area, an illegal area, and his mistake was both honest and reasonable, then that is a mistake of fact and he would have a defence to the charge.
The High Court was extremely critical of the government for prosecuting this fisherman in the circumstanes. It was a farce that the case made it to the highest court in the land but it did so because the court below did not follow longstanding principles of law that will never be changed and the government took the case to the High Court to ensure that those principles were preserved.
The situation you speak of is identical. The incorrect advice provided by the lackey about the legality of a substance is no defence to a charge of importing a prohibited substance.
Your only hope is if something did go wrong you use the advice given to you to persuade the prosecution to drop the charge, given the apparent unfairness and use this case to make your point. But if they do not listen then the court is left with no option but to convict.
