3 weeks ago, we told you that the Chief Justice, Kenneth Benjamin, had decided to re-open the habeas corpus case for Mark Seawell. He's been fighting his extradition to the US on narcotics importation charges for the last 10 years.
The Chief Justice heard this case in August of 2013. But he hasn't given a ruling on whether or not he will uphold the Chief Magistrate's decision that Sewell must be extradited to the US to face criminal trial. That delay allowed Sewell's attorneys to approach the court to re-open the case so that new arguments could be made on Mark Seawell's behalf.
Those new arguments were heard today, and Mark Seawell's lead attorney for this hearing was British Barrister Ben Cooper - the same one who managed to get his brother, Gary, free last year. They believe that once again, the Chief Magistrate's warrant of committal, which is the document being used to keep him in prison, is defective. Cooper argued this in a closed door session this morning. Seawell's legal team also say that the Chief Magistrate's warrant does not comply with the requirements of the 1870 Extradition Act.
The hearing went for a little over an hour where Acting Solicitor General Nigel Hawke was given an opportunity to respond on behalf of the Attorney General. When it was over, we got a chance to speak with Mark Seawell's legal team, and here's what they had to say about today's session:
Ben Cooper, Attorney for Mark Seawell
"The arguments that we have put forward today is a new argument in Mark Sewell's case. It wasn't raised before which now focuses on the validity of the committal whether it serves its purpose and whether the basic statitute of requirement of the extradition act were fulfilled by the chief magistrate responsible for his comital hearing."
Daniel Ortiz
"Share with us what are those, are you able to say sir?"
Ben Cooper, Attorney for Mark Seawell
"Yes the purpose of the warrant is to specify after the judge has assessed whether prima facie case is made out whether each and every offense alleged consists of a prima facie case on the evidence. The judge also has to determine whether dual criminality is made out and having considered all of the evidence and all of those tests, the judge needs to stipulate in the warrant each and every offense under the foreign law in issue that should determine those issues on."
Daniel Ortiz
"It's still a bit unclear sir, what is it particularly in this instance do you and the legal team believe was defective in this?"
Ben Cooper, Attorney for Mark Seawell
"I think it would probably be more appropriate for me to give more details or comment further after the chief justice has ruled on our arguments. For the moment our arguments are being presented to the court and judgment is reserved until Thursday next week. We really need to await the judge's assessment and determination of our arguments at this stage."
Reporter
"Sir are you able to say if there's any differences between this Seawell's brothers case as opposed to the other one?"
Ben Cooper, Attorney for Mark Seawell
"Yes I think it's probably not appropriate for me to go into the detail of the arguments which the court is considering at the moment."
Mark Seawell is also being represented by attorneys Anthony Sylvestre and Bryan Neal. The judge will hand down a decision on April 6, which is next week Thursday. We'll be there to tell you what he says.
Email
Print