Former Pakistani billionaire Arif Naqvi lost his bid to prevent extradition to the US after the high court in London refused him permission to appeal. Naqvi, who faces charges of money laundering, and defrauding Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, among others, unsuccessfully sought to rely upon Nirav Modi’s November 2022 appeal judgment, as Justice Jonathan Swift, on Wednesday (March 8), ruled that there were no bars to Naqvi’s extradition.
Naqvi was the founder of Abraaj, the Dubai-based private-equity fund, which had assets worth $14 billion at its peak before it collapsed in 2018. Abraaj was established in 2002, and the high-flying Naqvi won the confidence of the high and mighty by offering investment avenues in the emerging markets of North Africa and Middle East. Abraaj counted among its investors, pension funds, asset management firms, high networth individuals, a US government agency and institutions largely based in the US.
In or around 2017, allegations emerged of Naqvi diverting investors’ money to tide over perennial liquidity crunch and personal aggrandisement. Funds were also alleged to have been used to bribe a politician in Pakistan to facilitate the sale of Abraaj’s stake in an energy utility company in Karachi. Naqvi, denied all the allegations, but on April 10, 2019 he was arrested at Heathrow airport while on his way from Islamabad to Dubai. The US had sought his extradition on 16 counts of fraud and money laundering.
Just like Nirav Modi, Naqvi, too, lost the case at the Westminster Magistrates’ Court in January 2021 and went for an appeal in the high court. But Naqvi’s application for permission to appeal was adjourned in November 2021 to await the decision of the high court in the Nirav Modi appeal case. That is because the high court was already seized of Modi’s appeal and, just like in the case of Naqvi, had to decide whether the mental condition of the person sought to be extradited was such that it removes their capacity to resist the impulse to commit suicide. In legal jargon known as the Turner proposition 4, it lays down that if that is not the case i.e. if the person has the capacity to resist the impulse to commit suicide, then extradition would not be oppressive because death by suicide would be a voluntary act.
During the Nirav Modi appeal hearing before Justice Jeremy Stuart-Smith and Justice Robert Jay, it was contended that the test requiring an impulse to commit suicide was wrong in law and went against psychiatric science. Moreover, based on strident arguments by Edward Fitzgerald, representing Modi, the high court allowed examination of further evidence by expert witnesses. But, in November 2022, Nirav Modi ultimately lost the appeal which paved the way for Naqvi’s appeal to be heard.
Fitzgerald, appearing for Naqvi as well, told the high court on Tuesday (March 7) that there has been a sea-change in the evidentiary landscape and that the January 2021 Westminster court ruling failed to take into consideration the poor condition of prisons in the US, and that extradition would breach Naqvi’s human rights. “Whatever step is taken, Mr Naqvi will find a way to commit suicide,” said Fitzgerald to the court. He also cited the increased risk of violence to Naqvi while in Essex County Correctional Facility (ECCX) in New Jersey where he is to be kept. All of this was countered by Mark Summers, KC, who represented India in the Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi extradition cases.
The ruling by Justice Jonathan Swift marks the end of the (extradition) judicial route for Naqvi, but just like Modi and Mallya he, too, might have made some provisions to stall his removal. Unlike Modi, Naqvi is out on bail and lives with his family in Knightsbridge and has downsized his lifestyle. That is some consolation compared to Nirav Modi who on Thursday (March 9), appeared in courtroom 3 of the Barkingside Magistrates’ Court through a video link from his cell in Wandsworth prison. He appeared to answer the non-payment of fine imposed on 15 November 2022 which represented the outstanding legal cost of his lost extradition hearing. On Tuesday, this was the highest amount to be sought, much ahead than the second highest unpaid amount of £89157.72 for a certain Victor Oke, a resident of Ilford.
Nirav Modi told the Barkingside court that as his assets are frozen by the Government of India, he is not in a position to pay the legal cost, but instead sought to pay a monthly sum of £10,000 by borrowing money. Naqvi had managed to secure bail depositing the record sum of £15 million (it took him a few weeks to arrange the fund pending which he remained in custody), while Modi on his sixth unsuccessful bail attempt in October 2020 had offered £2 million. Apart from the difference of £13 million in the bail amount, Modi, unlike Naqvi, faced allegations of destroying evidence and intimidating witnesses which made judges apprehensive to grant him bail.
It has been four years since Nirav Modi was arrested in March 2019 and since then has remained in Wandsworth prison. By that yardstick, never mind the £15 million, Naqvi must be content to be ensconced in his London pad with his family, even though under a virtual 24-hour house arrest. A much congenial setting to plan his next steps than cooling heels in a prison cell like Modi.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
