There are some updates on the 26/11 Mumbai attack which happened back in 2008, which claimed many lives and left a trauma for many. One of the accused in the 26/11 attack, Tahawwur Rana is a step closer to extradition to India after the court in the US rejected the writ of habeas corpus filed by him. Tahawwur Rana is a Pakistani-origin Canadian businessman who is counted as one of the planners of the 26/11 attack.
After this rejection from the US court, this paved the way for the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to issue a certificate for Rana’s extradition to India. Rana is facing this trial in US court for his alleged involvement in the 2008 Mumbai terror attack.
However, Rana has filed an appeal against the order and sought a stay on his extradition to India till the time his appeal in the US Court is heard.
In June of this year, Rana submitted a ""writ of habeas corpus,"" contesting a court decision that granted the US government's appeal for the extradition of the individual accused in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks to India.
Rana had only made two basic arguments in the writ. First, he claimed that he cannot be extradited because India plans to prosecute him for the same acts for which he was charged in a United States court. His second argument was that the government has not established that there is probable cause to believe that Rana committed the Indian offenses. The US Court had denied both arguments of Rana.
Over the legitimacy of Rana’s business in India, the US attorney argued that Rana's claims about the legitimacy of his business in Mumbai falls flat. The attorney said that evidence does not support Rana's assertion that his Mumbai office conducted legitimate business. And even if it did, the engagement of legitimate business activities does not preclude a finding that Rana's business also served as a cover for Headley's terrorism-related activities in Mumbai.
The attorney argued that there is no surety to whether Rana lacked knowledge of Headley’s activities. He further tabled a point that even if Rana hoped to continue business operations in Mumbai, then neither Rana nor Headley renewed the business lease that expired approximately two weeks before the start of the Mumbai attacks. The attorney further stated the fact that Rana received a warning before the attacks does not preclude a finding of probable cause.
It was also put in court that when Headley learnt that Rana was going to travel to India in the fall of 2008, he warned Rana that an attack may be forthcoming. An FBI intercept reveals that Rana told Headley that their co-conspirator had warned him that the Mumbai attacks were imminent.
#MumbaiAttack #Pakistan #Terrorism #Attack #IndiaPakistan #USA #UnitedStates #IndiaUSA #JoeBiden #AmitShah #HWNews
After this rejection from the US court, this paved the way for the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to issue a certificate for Rana’s extradition to India. Rana is facing this trial in US court for his alleged involvement in the 2008 Mumbai terror attack.
However, Rana has filed an appeal against the order and sought a stay on his extradition to India till the time his appeal in the US Court is heard.
In June of this year, Rana submitted a ""writ of habeas corpus,"" contesting a court decision that granted the US government's appeal for the extradition of the individual accused in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks to India.
Rana had only made two basic arguments in the writ. First, he claimed that he cannot be extradited because India plans to prosecute him for the same acts for which he was charged in a United States court. His second argument was that the government has not established that there is probable cause to believe that Rana committed the Indian offenses. The US Court had denied both arguments of Rana.
Over the legitimacy of Rana’s business in India, the US attorney argued that Rana's claims about the legitimacy of his business in Mumbai falls flat. The attorney said that evidence does not support Rana's assertion that his Mumbai office conducted legitimate business. And even if it did, the engagement of legitimate business activities does not preclude a finding that Rana's business also served as a cover for Headley's terrorism-related activities in Mumbai.
The attorney argued that there is no surety to whether Rana lacked knowledge of Headley’s activities. He further tabled a point that even if Rana hoped to continue business operations in Mumbai, then neither Rana nor Headley renewed the business lease that expired approximately two weeks before the start of the Mumbai attacks. The attorney further stated the fact that Rana received a warning before the attacks does not preclude a finding of probable cause.
It was also put in court that when Headley learnt that Rana was going to travel to India in the fall of 2008, he warned Rana that an attack may be forthcoming. An FBI intercept reveals that Rana told Headley that their co-conspirator had warned him that the Mumbai attacks were imminent.
#MumbaiAttack #Pakistan #Terrorism #Attack #IndiaPakistan #USA #UnitedStates #IndiaUSA #JoeBiden #AmitShah #HWNews
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 Hello everyone this is Aminah Ansari welcome to HW News English
00:04 There are some updates on the 26/11 Mumbai attack which happened back in 2008 which claimed
00:11 many lives and left a trauma for many. One of the accused in the 26/11 attack, Tahabur
00:18 Rana is a step closer to extradition to India after the court in the US rejected the writ
00:23 of Hibbius Corpus filed by him. Tahabur Rana is a Pakistani origin Canadian businessman
00:29 who is counted as one of the planners of the 26/11 attack. After this rejection in the
00:35 US court, this paved the way for the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to issue a certificate
00:41 for Rana's extradition to India. Rana is facing this trial in the US court for his
00:47 alleged involvement in the 2008 Mumbai terror attack. However, Rana has filed an appeal
00:52 against the order and sought a stay on his extradition to India till the time his appeal
00:57 in the US court is heard. In June of this year, Rana submitted a writ of Hibbius Corpus
01:04 contesting a court decision that granted the US government's appeal for the extradition
01:09 of the individual accused in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks to India. Rana had only made
01:14 two basic arguments in the writ. First, he claimed that he cannot be extradited because
01:20 India plans to prosecute him in the same act for which he was charged in the United States
01:25 court. His second argument was that the government has not established that there is a probable
01:30 cause to believe that Rana committed the Indian offences. The US court had denied both arguments
01:36 of Rana over the legitimacy of Rana's business in India. The US attorney argued that Rana's
01:43 claim about his legitimacy of his business in Mumbai falls flat. The attorney said that
01:49 evidences does not support Rana's assertion that his Mumbai office conducted legitimate
01:54 business. And even if it did, the engagement of his legitimate business activities does
02:00 not prelude a finding that Rana's business also served as a cover for Headley's terrorism-related
02:05 activities in Mumbai. The attorney argued that there is no surety whether Rana lacked
02:11 knowledge of Headley's activities. He further tabled a point that even if Rana hoped to
02:16 continue business operations in Mumbai, then neither Rana nor Headley renewed the business
02:21 lease that expired approximately two weeks before the start of Mumbai attacks. The attorney
02:26 further stated the fact that Rana received a warning before the attacks but does not
02:32 prelude a finding of probable cause. It was also put in court that when Headley learned
02:38 that Rana was going to travel to India in fall of 2008, he warned Rana that an attack
02:43 may be forthcoming. An FBI intercept revealed that Rana told Headley that their conspirator
02:50 had warned him that the Mumbai attacks were imminent.
02:54 That's all for this news report. For more such news and updates subscribe to SW News English.
02:59 [MUSIC PLAYING]