The  case of Jean Rony Jean Charles took center stage yesterday as proceedings got underway yesterday in the Supreme Court, with his attorney  Fred Smith  saying that  his client’s deportation was unlawful and unjust.

The hearing before Mr. Justice Gregory Hilton was prompted by a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Mr. Smith and Rights Bahamas  on behalf of Jean Rony’s family.

In his  submission Mr. Smith argued that  documents  filed by the Department of Immigration on December 8th does not lawfully justify the arrest or detention of the applicant (Jean Rony).

He said  this case was not complicated; either the arrest was lawful or it wasn’t.

Mr. Smith further charged that the documents presented by the department for a one “Jean Charles” had a conflicting birth date from the certificate provided by Jean Rony’s  family.

He noted that this factual issue highlighted whether the person the Immigration Department has referred to as Jean Charles was actually Jean Rony Charles.

Based on the order filed by the Immigration Department, Jean Rony was arrested during a routine status check on Fire Trail Road and was asked to produce his documents which he failed to do and was then remanded to the Detention Center.

The lawyer  also argued that the respondents themselves have yet to produce a deportation order for Jean Rony’s deportation;  adding that they themselves admitted  that his client is a Bahamian, based on a repatriation list that states his birthplace as Nassau, Bahamas.

Countering for the Crown was Gary Francis who in his opening submission said the writ was flawed, as the law requires that an affidavit being made in the third  person must state why the person cannot make it them self.

He argued that  the application was erroneous and defective and should be dismissed by the court.

Mr. Francis said that the Department of Immigration is unable to bring back the man in question, as he is out of their jurisdiction, and asking the government to extract this individual from a foreign country was a nearly impossible task.

He added that ultimately, the information  that was provided by Jean Charles was meant to deceive officials and unfortunately led to his own deportation.

Attorney Smith then countered by saying there is no sworn affidavit by the respondents or airplane manifesto to confirm if Jean Rony was actually flown out.

The matter was adjourned for a ruling.