Dataram extradition quest hearing adjourned to March 3
LEGAL arguments yesterday dominated further hearing in the proceedings  surrounding the quest to extradite alleged fugitive Barry Dataram to the United States.
But, after listening to attorney-at-law Mr. Anil Nandlall, representing Crime Police Crime Chief Seelall Persaud and Mr. Vic Puran, for Dataram, Acting Chief  Magistrate Melissa Robertson adjourned the matter to March 3.
Assistant Commissioner Persaud is seeking to swear to information to facilitate the extradition application but Puran, who is associated with Mr. Glen Hanoman, raised additional objections to those he submitted on Thursday.
Puran said the document before the magistrate is part of one that was previously thrown out when the application was first made in 2008.
He said the applicant, Persaud would be relying on the Fugitive Amendment Act 2009 which cannot be used retroactively.
Puran contended there is nothing on record by the informant to show that the offences alleged do not offend the double criminality rule and are statute barred.
“In other words, there is nothing to show that they are alive in the U.S. The warrant for these offences was issued in 2004. The information on oath is further affected in that it does not state, anywhere, that these offences would still be alive in Guyana,” Puran maintained.
He urged the Magistrate to find sufficient cause in his contention that the amended 2009 act is unconstitutional and challenged the Court’s jurisdiction to deal with the case.
Puran said there is authority for the Magistrate to refer it to the High Court for advice or for the applicant or the detained person to do so.
In response, Nandlall said all that is before the Court is a provisional warrant and the application is being made under Section 13 of the Fugitive Offenders Act.
He requested that the Magistrate to lay over the request and proceed with the swearing as the Minister of Home Affairs has been asked by the U.S. Government to return Dataram to that country.
However, Puran said the Magistrate would need to see the documentation to  determine if the request pre-dated the 2009 Act and can only adjudicate on an authenticated document.
Nandlall said the Court documents that were tendered all came from a Superior Court of record from the U.S. and are authenticated by the relevant officers at the U.S. Embassy in Guyana.
He pressed for the grant of a provisional arrest warrant  and declared that, at this stage, the person against whom the edict is sought does not have a right to be heard.
Consequently, Puran and Hanoman ought not to be allowed to speak, said Nandlall, who added that Dataram is in custody accused of trafficking in narcotics locally and not for the current process.