Judicial review of detention orders under the Dangerous Drugs Act is limited to procedural compliance, not the merits of the decision.

[1] This is an application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus at the instance of the applicant in respect of a Detention Order ("DO") made by the 1st respondent on 13 March 2018 ordering the applicant's detention for a period of two (2) years pursuant to the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 (Act 316) ("the Act").

(B) Background

[2] On 19 January 2018, the applicant was arrested at Jalan Pudu, Pudu Kuala Lumpur. On 23 January 2018, Inspector Pathmanaban a/l Balakrishnan met with the applicant in order to record his statement after which the statement was handed over to ASP Munian a/l Muniandy.

[3] On 29 January 2018, DSP Ahmad Dahuri bin Mohamed Isa received the case file from ASP Munian a/l Muniandy and reported the fact of the arrest to ACP Dalbir Singh a/l Tanah Singh.

[4] On 30 January 2018, the Report under s 3(2)(c) of the Act was prepared by ACP Dalbir Singh a/l Tanah Singh and sent to the Deputy Minister of Home Affairs ("Minister").

[5] On 22 February 2018, the police investigating officer, ASP Munian a/l Muniandy submitted the Complete Report of Investigation against the applicant to the Minister and to the Inquiry Officer (IO), Siti Khadijah Binti Mohd Pisol.

[6] On 6 March 2018, the IO conducted an inquiry under s 5 of the Act and on the same day submitted the Complete Report of the Inquiry to the Minister.

[7] On 13 March 2018, the Minister issued the DO against the applicant pursuant to s 6(1) of the Act and instructed Mohd Adzharuddein bin Baharom to prepare a statement containing the reasons for the making of the DO as well as the Statement of Facts on which the DO was based.

[8] On the same day, the applicant was served one copy of the DO, one original statement containing the reasons for the making of the DO, the Statement of Facts on which the DO was based and 3 copies of Form 1.

[9] On 14 March 2018, the applicant was transported to the Detention Centre ("Pusat Permulihan Akhlak") Simpang Rengam, Johor.

[10] On 15 March 2018, the Advisory Board received Form 1. On 29 March 2018, the meeting of the Advisory Board was adjourned to 10 April 2018 upon the application of the applicant in order for him to appoint counsel.

[11] On 10 April 2018 the meeting of the Advisory Board was adjourned to 24 April 2018 on application of counsel for the applicant on the grounds that he is attending to a hearing at the Temerloh Court, Pahang.

[12] On 24 April 2018 the meeting of the Advisory Board was adjourned to 16 May 2018 upon application of counsel for the applicant on the grounds that he is attending to a hearing at the Termerloh Court, Pahang.

[13] On 16 May 2018, the Advisory Board meeting commenced with the attendance of the applicant. On 22 May 2018, the Advisory Board submits their recommendations to the Yang di-Pertuan Agung ("YDPA").

[14] On 6 June 2016, the YDPA consented to the recommendations of the Advisory Board.

(C) Preliminary Objection

[15] At the outset of this application, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there were five affidavits filed out of time by the respondents which delay was stated to be by 48 days.

[16] The applicant therefore objected to the said affidavits being used for the purposes of this application.

[17] The explanation rendered by the respondents for the delay was explained by way of an affidavit on the part of the respondents (encl 3) in Case No: WA-44-167-10-2018 affirmed on 5 October 2018. This principally related to the whereabouts of the Deputy Minister, Dato' Masir Kujat ("Minister") prior to 24 September 2018 and hence the failure to file affidavits within the time frame and the failure to justify such delay.

[18] In particular, the affidavit explained that the Minister was in Kuching, Sarawak at the material time, ie 5 October 2018 (the