Nik Nasrun Nazmi bin Nik Mohamad

On the court record

Nik Nasrun Nazmi bin Nik Mohamad appears in the corpus in immigration-detention and land litigation, argued from the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) to the Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan). Two matters, appearing for the applicant at first instance and the appellant in the apex court, concerned a writ of habeas corpus sought on behalf of a person held at an immigration detention depot after completing a term of imprisonment. The detainee had been dealt with under section 6(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1959 for entering without a valid pass, and although the prison term had expired she remained in custody under an Order of Removal made under section 33(1) and an Order of Detention pending removal made under section 34(1); the questions were whether the continued detention had become unlawful so as to warrant a writ of habeas corpus, and the matter engaged the interplay between the separation of powers and the judiciary's role as a check on executive power, the balance between the personal liberty of the individual and the State's power to detain in the interests of national security, and the detaining authority's duty of inquiry, in circumstances where the detainee held a card from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. A further matter, in the High Court and appearing for the respondent, concerned an application under 'seksyen 327(1) Kanun Tanah Negara' (section 327(1) of the National Land Code) to remove a private caveat, which turned on whether the caveator had shown an interest in the land raising a serious question to be tried and whether, on the balance of convenience, it was better to maintain the status quo until trial. The habeas corpus matter is among the most consequential kinds of case a court decides, because it pits the personal liberty of an individual against the executive's asserted power to detain, and it required the court to weigh the length of time already spent in custody, the duty of inquiry owed by the detaining authority, and the significance of the detainee's recognition by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Across the appearances the practice combines the constitutional law of liberty and immigration detention with the law of caveats and interests in land.