‘Let’s get on with extradition case’

Lance Small Habeas Corpus hearing

A HIGH COURT judge yesterday dismissed the application for a writ of habeas corpus brought by wanted fugitive Lance Small and cleared the way for the extradition proceedings to resume before a magistrate on Monday. The extradition hearing will continue with just one more witness to give evidence before the magistrate. Justice Prakash Moosai, presiding in the Port-of-Spain High Court, upheld the preliminary objection submitted by Senior Counsel Douglas Mendes, who represented the Commissioner of Prisons. Justice Moosai accepted Mendes’ submission that the extradition proceedings in the Port-of-Spain Magistrates’ Court should be completed before any further legal challenges are mounted by Small and his team of lawyers.

The judge found that the evidence on behalf of the requesting State — the United States — was almost at an end before Senior Magistrate Joanne Connor. He said he had to decide whether the High Court should entertain challenges before the completion of the extradition hearing. He agreed with legal authorities from the House of Lords that all the evidence should be led before the magistrate before any of the parties can apply for a prerogative writ. Justice Moosai pointed out that Pamela Elder SC, attorney for Small, had submitted that the alleged offences for which her client was charged, were committed between April 17, 2000 and May 30, 2001. She stated that prior to the amendment to the Extradition (Commonwealth and Foreign Territories) Act 2004, firearm offences were not extraditable. She said the amendment did not apply to Small.

Mendes submitted that the application for a writ of habeas corpus was hopeless and was bound to fail. He said Section 16 of the amending Act was clearly intended to have retrospectivity, and therefore, the offences for which Small was charged, were valid. Justice Moosai said it was not clear that the extradition proceedings before the magistrate would fail. He said that based on the evidence before him, the extradition proceedings are nearing completion and he felt that a lot of time would be saved if the committal proceedings continue. He then dismissed the application for a writ of habeas corpus without going into the merits of the substantive issue.