HIGH Court Justice Frank Seepersad yesterday allowed attorneys representing businessman Dominic Hadeed and his wife, Genevieve, to inspect police station diaries amid claims that an ordinary criminal investigation was abruptly transformed into one under the Emergency Powers Regulations.The ruling came during a virtual hearing of a habeas corpus application challenging the couple’s continued detention. Hadeed and his wife are currently in prison custody.The couple was arrested last week as part of a police investigation into alleged criminal conduct—namely conspiracy to assassinate members of the government.Their attorneys have maintained that, at the time of the arrests, the matter was being treated as a routine criminal investigation and not one conducted under the Emergency Powers Regulations.Senior counsel Douglas Mendes, appearing with Gilbert Peterson, SC, Faris Al-Rawi, SC, Carlon McLeod and Chase Pegus, sought a short adjournment to review the station diary entries relating to the arrests.Mendes told the court that, based on instructions received, the couple was initially arrested under what he described as the “run-of-the-mill” powers of police to detain, question and charge suspects. He said there was no indication at that stage that the arrests were being made pursuant to the Emergency Powers Regulations or a Preventive Detention Order (PDO).However, he said that after a habeas corpus application was filed in the High Court on Saturday, the applicants were suddenly detained under a PDO.“This raises serious questions,” Mendes submitted, adding that what appeared to have started as an ordinary criminal investigation was later transformed into one under emergency legislation. He suggested that the sequence of events pointed to a possible abuse of ordinary investigative powers and was “not in good faith.”Mendes told the judge that the applicants had come before the court on the basis that, at the time of filing, their detention was unlawful.Attorneys for the Commissioner of Police however, stated that detention orders were in fact issued prior to the formal issuance of the PDO, a point the defence said further underscored their concerns.Justice Seepersad pointed out to that the matter before him was not a constitutional motion but a habeas corpus application.“This is not a constitutional motion before the court,” he said. “But I do accept the court always retains a supervisory jurisdiction so as to determine and to be satisfied that the proper process is invoked.” He added that he did not want the court’s time utilised beyond what was absolutely necessary, questioning what the impact was of the PDO on the court’s authority as it relates to an issuing of a habeas.The judge nevertheless granted permission for the inspection of the station diaries, noting that it could likely be done “in relatively short order.”Al-Rawi told the court that the defence team could inspect the diary and seek further instructions from their clients, adding that affidavits in response would be filed by this morning.Police Commissioner Allister Guevarro attended the hearing and was represented by attorneys Ramdath Phillip and Anya Ramute-Mohan.The hearing took place against the wider backdrop of multiple detentions arising out of the same police exercise. Star Sabga, the aunt of Genevieve Hadeed was also detained last week and remains in prison custody. However, Justice Seepersad noted that the habeas corpus application before the court yesterday did not relate to Sabga’s detention.Justice Seepersad first heard the habeas corpus application on Saturday morning, when the matter was adjourned to yesterday to allow the State to file affidavits responding to the challenge to the lawfulness of the couple’s detention.The matter will again come up for hearing this morning at 10 o’clock.