KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 2 — There was high drama in the High Court room here today after family members and counsel representing an Iranian, who is being sought by US authorities, tried to stop immigration officers from re-arresting him.
Farhadi, 34, a PhD student with a private college here, was hugged by his wife and family members immediately after Kamardin handed down his decision.
A heated argument broke out between senior federal counsel Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar and Farhadi’s counsel, Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, when the latter confronted the immigration officers to ask the reason his client was being detained.
“If you want to arrest him, then you must be able inform him for what offences he is being arrested for. You can’t simply handcuff him just like that in the court room,” said Muhammad Shafee to one of the immigration officers, who were in plainclothes.
Farhadi’s wife, who was cheerful when the judge pronounced his judgment, was in tears when she went to seek clarification from Shafee.
Mohd Dusuki tried to explain to Shafee and Farhadi’s family members that even though the court had ordered Farhadi to be freed, he still needed to be in custody to facilitate investigation for two alleged offences under the Immigration Act 1959/63.
After Farhadi was taken away by the Immigration officers, Shafee and his co-counsel step out from the court room to discuss the next cause of action.
Shafee, when contacted later, told Bernama that his client had been in custody for nearly one and half years at the Sungei Buloh Prison and the Immigration Department should have completed its investigation and charged him, if any offence had been committed.
The lawyer said he would be sending a notice of demand to the Immigration Department for the immediate release of his client.
On November 11 last year, the Session Court had allowed an application by the prosecution to facilitate the Home Ministry to extradite Farhadi to the US.
Farhadi is wanted by the US authorities for more than 30 counts of violating the trade embargo against Iran, forgery and smuggling of goods at the Northern District of California.
During today’s proceeding, in allowing the habeas corpus application, Kamardin ruled that the order issued by the lower court and the warrant of committal issued under section 20 of the Extradition Act 1992 were not carried out with the applicable laws.
He said the corresponding offences preferred against the applicant failed to satisfy the cardinal principle of double criminality rule and that they were not extradition offence.
“The applicant had succeeded in showing defects and irregularities on the part of the respondents and the Session Court judge in applying the laws and the procedures while dealing with this case,” stated Kamardin in his 16-page judgment.
He ordered the order detaining the applicant at the Sungai Buloh Prison pending the issuance of the order by the Home Ministry for the extradition to be set aside and the applicant to be released immediately. – Bernama
You May Also Like