Court: Extradition provisions valid, no judicial encroachment

Two disputed provisions in the Extradition Act 1992 are valid as they do not involve any interference in the judiciary by the home minister, the Court of Appeal ruled.

A three-person bench chaired by judge Azizah Nawawi unanimously allowed the government’s appeal linked to attempts to extradite two Perak businesspersons wanted by the United States.

Ling Yang Ching and Wong Ong Hua are wanted by the US. They are to face charges of allegedly masterminding a global hacking operation perpetrating identity theft and ransomware attacks.

US authorities also claimed the duo were involved in intelligence gathering on Hong Kong activists.

The government was appealing against a Kuala Lumpur High Court decision in January last year that nullified Sections 4 and 20 of the law.

Azizah this morning ruled that the provisions are constitutionally valid as they do not give power to the executive arm of government to interfere in the way courts conduct full trials.

She said that extradition proceedings before the Sessions Courts are not full trials to determine the guilt or innocence of a wanted person but to determine whether there is enough evidence to warrant extradition.

On behalf of bench member judges See Mee Chun and Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, Azizah allowed the government’s appeal with no order as to costs.

Appeal being considered

When met by the media after proceedings, the two businesspersons’ counsel Tey Jun Ren said they would discuss whether to file an appeal leave application to the Federal Court.

Section 4 is about the home minister’s power to direct the extradition of a suspect to a requesting foreign country to face criminal charges. Section 20 states that a court is to ensure a suspect’s detention, pending the ministerial order.

The police detained Ling and Wong on Sept 14, 2020, following the US government’s application for their extradition.

Two years later, the duo filed an originating summons asking the Kuala Lumpur High Court to determine several constitutional questions on the validity of the extradition clauses.

The duo’s constitutional bid was meant to strengthen their attempt to defeat the extradition proceedings pending before the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court.

The High Court allowed the duo’s constitutional challenge in January last year. However, today’s appellate ruling nullified this by restoring the validity of the extradition provisions.

Both men are currently out on bail.

Penang reclamation goes ahead after 'dismayed' fisherfolk lose case

Former Nenggiri rep secures mid by-election campaign court date

Labuan MP files to quash expulsion from Bersatu

I lodged report against Papagomo to prevent riots: Witness

Razak not testifying implies complicity in Altantuya's murder, court rules

Court allows Daim's wife to get passport temporarily for overseas trips