'Bourdon's deportation against natural justice'
Published: Jul 25, 2011 6:59 PM | Updated: Jul 25, 2011 7:05 PM
The Bar Council today criticised the "arbitrary detention and deportation" of French civil rights lawyer William Bourdon as "contrary to natural justice".
Reason provided by Immigration Department that French lawyer violated conditions of his social visit pass is vague, says Bar Council.
The Bar Council today criticised the "arbitrary detention and deportation" of French civil rights lawyer William Bourdon as "contrary to natural justice".
"The reason reportedly provided by the Immigration Department - that the lawyer had violated the conditions of his social visit pass - is vague and wholly inadequate," said its chairperson Lim Chee Wee (left).
The unclear charge, Lim said, hampered Bourdon's ability to answer the charges levelled against him, and that this was against the "principles of natural justice in administrative law".
Legally, the basis for deportation should have been furnished to Bourdon so that he could have defended himself against the allegations and in this, Lim referred to the 1987 Supreme Court case of JP Berthelson vs the director-general of Immigration, Malaysia, & others.
In that case, Berthelson's lawyer argued that the rules of natural justice require that a person who will be affected by an administrative body's decision must be given the opportunity to be heard.
Bourdon (left), Lim said, has a legitimate expectation to defend himself, as it would be unfair to condemn anyone, or to deprive anyone of a right, without hearing what he or she has to say.
The Bar called on the government to publicly justify its grounds for deporting the French lawyer, and to cease such actions of arbitrary detention and deportation.
"This incident is another negative mark on the government's record on rights and fundamental liberties, which on this occasion involves a foreigner," Lim said.
Irregularities surrounding the Bourdon's deportation, he added, would only reinforce public perception that the deportation came as the result of his talk on alleged corruption in the Malaysian government's purchase of submarines from a French company.
"The reason reportedly provided by the Immigration Department - that the lawyer had violated the conditions of his social visit pass - is vague and wholly inadequate," said its chairperson Lim Chee Wee (left).The unclear charge, Lim said, hampered Bourdon's ability to answer the charges levelled against him, and that this was against the "principles of natural justice in administrative law".
Legally, the basis for deportation should have been furnished to Bourdon so that he could have defended himself against the allegations and in this, Lim referred to the 1987 Supreme Court case of JP Berthelson vs the director-general of Immigration, Malaysia, & others.
In that case, Berthelson's lawyer argued that the rules of natural justice require that a person who will be affected by an administrative body's decision must be given the opportunity to be heard.
Bourdon (left), Lim said, has a legitimate expectation to defend himself, as it would be unfair to condemn anyone, or to deprive anyone of a right, without hearing what he or she has to say.The Bar called on the government to publicly justify its grounds for deporting the French lawyer, and to cease such actions of arbitrary detention and deportation.
"This incident is another negative mark on the government's record on rights and fundamental liberties, which on this occasion involves a foreigner," Lim said.
Irregularities surrounding the Bourdon's deportation, he added, would only reinforce public perception that the deportation came as the result of his talk on alleged corruption in the Malaysian government's purchase of submarines from a French company.
View Comments0