Acting Chief Magistrate Melissa Robertson yesterday deferred her ruling on whether to grant Crime Chief Seelall Persaud’s application for a provisional arrest warrant for Barry Dataram on a trafficking in narcotics matter.
This is the fourth time since 2007 that Dataram of Ruimzight Gardens, West Coast Demerara, has had a provisional warrant sought in the court for his arrest by the Crime Chief.
However, in those cases the warrant was for the purpose of extraditing him to the US since he is wanted there for alleged cocaine smuggling.
Dataram’s lawyers Vic Puran in association with Glenn Hanoman made an appearance on behalf of their client yesterday at the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court.
Puran in his submission to the court yesterday stated that the warrant requested by Persaud is unlawful since his client is already in police custody and should be released.
He noted that the police could only arrest a fugitive on a warrant and noted that to his knowledge his client is not a wanted man.
After taking a look at the document Persaud presented to the court, Puran objected to it stating that it was only to entertain the court.
He went on to say that Persaud’s swearing to the warrant yesterday is an abuse of the process of the court since it should have been done before Dataram was arrested.
He noted that Persaud failed to disclose an ex parte application.
He also noted that the Full Court had previously squashed at least three provisional warrants that Persaud had applied for before in relation to his client. Puran added that those squashed warrants were for the same or identical matter.
He further posited that Persaud was seeking for the magistrate to “clothe his illegal actions” by now granting him the provisional warrant.
He said that the Full Court which consists of Justices (ag) Ian Chang and William Ramlal had first ruled that there can be no extradition unless the treaty between Guyana and the US is amended and added that although this Act had been amended last year the matter is already bound by the ruling in the Full Court that no one can be extradited when the Act is coupled with the treaty.
The government had announced that it would modify the law, and last October it passed an amendment to the Fugitive Offenders Act 1988 to address the conflict that arose within the law regarding individuals here being extradited.
The amendment also controversially included a provision which empowers the Home Affairs Minister to decide whether to extradite or not.
Persaud also told the court yesterday that Dataram is indeed in police custody and that his presence in the court had nothing to do with what Puran had stated.
He said that the warrant he was applying for was in relation to the trafficking in narcotics matter and added that investigations into this matter are currently ongoing.
Puran then stated that he hoped that Persaud’s undertaking in court yesterday would not cause the removal of Dataram from Guyana without the order of the court since according to him, he believed that the state had acted unlawfully by violating Dataram’s rights.
The magistrate then adjourned the matter to today when she will decide whether or not to grant Persaud the provisional arrest warrant.