Three-judge panel rules two sections of Extradition Act as valid


PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal by the Home Ministry and four others to reinstate two provisions in the Extradition Act 1992 previously struck down by the High Court.

This ruling overturned the High Court’s decision last year which ruled in favour of businessmen Ling Yang Ching and Wong Ong Hua’s suit regarding the validity of certain provisions in the Extradition Act 1992.

According to Bernama, a three-judge panel led by Justice Datuk Azizah Nawawi, ruled that the two sections are valid and do not contravene the provision of judicial power under Article 121 (1) of the Federal Constitution, as well as Articles 4, 5, 8 and 9 concerning fundamental liberties.

In allowing the appeal by the public prosecutor, Home Minister, Home Ministry and the Malaysian government, Justice Azizah said extradition proceedings were not intended to determine the guilt of a person but the sufficiency of evidence for extradition purposes.

Justice Azizah, who sat with Datuk See Mee Chun and Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, said extradition proceedings were committal proceedings and not trials, adding that there was no issue of the Home Minister interfering with the exercise of judicial power of the Sessions Court.

In setting aside the decision of the High Court, Justice Azizah said: “We find the High Court (judge) has erred in law in his decision, warranting appellate intervention.”

In 2021, businessmen Ling and Wong, sought by the US Department of Justice for their alleged involvement in a major hacking syndicate, filed a lawsuit asking the High Court to determine several constitutional questions on the validity of the extradition law.

In January last year, High Court judge Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh struck down Sections 4 and 20 of the Act after ruling the provisions contravened Article 121(1) of the Federal Constitution and the fundamental liberties of the businessmen.

Section 4 deals with the Home Minister’s power to direct the extradition of a suspect to face criminal charges in a requesting country.

Section 20 states the court must commit the suspect to detention, pending the minister’s order to surrender him.

The US government wanted them to face charges in the District of Columbia for allegedly running a global hacking operation to steal identities, video game technology and plant ransomware, as well as spy on Hong Kong activists.

They were produced before a Sessions Court for the government to secure extradition orders.

In their application to the High Court, they alleged that both provisions of the Extradition Act violated articles in the Constitution that touch on fundamental liberties and judicial power.

Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan and Liew Horng Bin appeared for the public prosecutor, Home Minister, Home Ministry and the Malaysian government while lawyer Tey Jun Ren acted for the businessmen.

Tey told the media that he would get instructions from his clients on whether to seek leave at the Federal Court to appeal yesterday’s ruling.

Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel for breaking news alerts and key updates!
   

Next In Nation

Telegram the top choice of scammers with over 1,300 cases, says CCID director
Authorities investigate school bus driver for inappropriate content featuring children
Malaysia's demographic dilemma: Challenges loom as fertility drops and population ages
Running on empathy: Love scams reaped RM20mil this year, says CCID director
Jobless man pleads guilty to charge of murdering parents
Replanting efforts restore greenery to parts of Mt Brinchang
Research a key component in improving dental health status, says Health Ministry
Jalan Masjid India area safe, says KL mayor
Inaugural Malaysia Furniture Furnishings Market establishes vibrant wholesale B2B furniture platform
Time to make it easier for victims of online crimes get justice, says Gobind

Others Also Read