Lawyers argues extradition law violates rights of individuals: Lawyer

A lawyer for businessman Steve Ferguson argued in court on Wednesday that his clients rights have been violated by the provisions of of the Extradition Act 1985, claiming the legislation derogates fundamental rights of citizens.

Fyard Hosein quoted from English jurist Lord Hoffman to make the point that the extradition process is “a violation of rights.” He asked a panel of the Court of Appeal to quash the decision by Attorney General Anand Ramlogan to sign warrants for the extradition of his client and businessman Ishwar Galbaransingh.

Hosein said the legislation was not passed with the three-fifths majority needed for such bills and therefore runs counter to Section 13 of the Constitution which he said expressly states that the three-fifths majority vote is required for the passing of such a statute.

Section 13(2) states: “An act to which this section applies is one the bill for which has been passed by both Houses of Parliament and at the final vote thereon in each House has been supported by the votes of not less than three-fifths of all the members of that House.”

However Section 13(1) states that the act may apply although it is inconsistent with Sections 4 and 5 of the Constitution.

Hosein told the court the effect of the Act is that it vests the power of extradition in the hands of the executive, thereby making it a breach of the Separation of Powers guaranteed in the Trinidad and Tobago constitution.

On October 9 Ramlogan signed off on warrants for the extradition of Ferguson and Galbaransingh to the United States to face several fraud charges in relation to the construction of the Piarco Airport terminal building.

Both men are using every legal opportunity to fight their extradition.