A habeas corpus application becomes academic when the detenu is remanded by a court, upholding that historical illegalities do not affect the legality of current detentions.

JUDGMENT

Aslam Zainuddin JC:

[1] In this case the sole issue that arose was whether in a habeas corpus application, once the detenu is no longer under the detention of the respondents, but is being remanded by an order of court as opposed to the earlier detention under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 Act 747 (" SOSMA "), the matter has become academic and therefore can be dismissed without going into the merits of the complaint. The brief undisputed facts of the case are that the appellant was detained on 20 June 2021 under s 4 of for 28 days until 17 July 2021 to be investigated under s 130V of the Penal Code because he was suspected of being a member of an organised criminal group. However, on the 13 July 2021 the appellant was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions court under the said provision of the Penal Code and was remanded by the court. Hence the respondents raised a preliminary objection on the return day of the motion that the application for a writ of habeas corpus has become academic. After perusing the submissions and authorities filed by the parties, I agreed with the respondents and dismissed the motion. My reasons now follow.

The Law

[2] Article 5 of the Federal Constitution provides:

Part II

FUNDAMENTAL LIBERTIES Liberty of the person

5. (1) No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.

(2) Where complaint is made to a High court or any judge thereof that a person is being unlawfully detained the court shall inquire into the complaint and, unless satisfied that the detention is lawful, shall order him to be produced before the court and release him.

(3) Where a person is arrested he shall be informed as soon as may be of the grounds of his arrest and shall be allowed to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.

(4) Where a person is arrested and not released he shall without unreasonable delay, and in any case within twenty-four hours (excluding the time of any necessary journey) be produced before a magistrate and shall not be further detained in custody without the magistrate's authority:

Provided that this Clause shall not apply to the arrest or detention of any person under the existing law relating to restricted residence, and all the provisions of this Clause shall be deemed to have been an integral part of this Article as from Merdeka Day:

Provided further that in its application to a person, other than a citizen, who is arrested or detained under the law relating to immigration, this Clause shall be read as if there were substituted for the words "without unreasonable delay, and in any case within twenty-four hours (excluding the time of any necessary journey)" the words "within fourteen days":

And provided further that in the case of an arrest for an offence which is triable by a Syariah court, references in this Clause to a magistrate shall be construed as including references to a judge of a Syariah court.

(5) Clauses (3) and (4) do not apply to an enemy alien.

[3] The Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (" SOSMA ") provides:

Power of arrest and detention

4. (1) A police officer may, without warrant, arrest and detain any person whom he has reason to believe to be involved in security offences.

(2) A person arrested under subsection (1) shall be informed as soon as may be of the grounds of his arrest by the police officer making the arrest.

(3) No person shall be arrested and detained under this section solely for his political belief or political activity.

(4) The person arrested and detained under subsection (1) may be detained for a period of twenty-four hours for the purpose of investigation.

(5) Notwithstanding subsection (4), a police officer of or above the rank of Superintendent of Police may extend the period of detention for a period of not more than twenty-eight days, for the purpose of investigation.

(6) If the police officer is of the view that further detention is not necessary under subsection (5), the pers