Petroleum Development Act

PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT ACT 1974

ACT 144

Preamble

An Act to provide for exploration and exploitation of petroleum whether onshore or offshore by a Corporation in which will be vested the entire ownership in and the exclusive rights, powers, liberties and privileges in respect of the said petroleum, and to control the carrying on of downstream activities and development relating to petroleum and its products; to provide for the establishment of a Corporation under the Companies Act, 1965 or under the law relating to the incorporation of companies and for the powers of that Corporation; and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

[Am. Act A613]

[1 October 1974]

BE IT ENACTED by the Duli Yang Maha Mulia Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong with the advice and consent of the Dewan Negara and Dewan Rakyat in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

1. Short title and commencement.

This Act may be cited as the Petroleum Development Act, 1974, and shall come into force on such date as the Prime Minister may notify in the Gazette.

2. Ownership.

(1) The entire ownership in, and the exclusive rights, powers, liberties and privileges of exploring, exploiting, winning and obtaining petroleum whether onshore or offshore of Malaysia shall be vested in a Corporation to be incorporated under the Companies Act 1965, or under the law relating to incorporation of companies.

(2) The vesting of the ownership, rights, powers, liberties and privileges referred to in subsection (l) shall take effect on the execution of an instrument in the form contained in the Schedule to this Act.

(3) The ownership and the exclusive rights, powers, liberties and privileges so vested shall be irrevocable and shall enure for the benefit of the Corporation and its successor.

3. The Corporation.

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 22 of the Companies Act 1965, relating to the names of companies, the Corporation shall be styled as the Petroleum Nasional Berhad or in short form PETRONAS.

(2) The Corporation shall be subject to the control and direction of the Prime Minister who may from time to time issue such direction as he may deem fit.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Companies Act 1965, or any other written law to the contrary, the direction so issued shall be binding on the Corporation.

3A. Powers of the Corporation.

(1) In additional to all the powers of the Corporation as prescribed in its Memorandum and Articles of Association, the Corporation shall have the power to take over or acquire by agreement, assignment, purchase or by any other means the whole or any part of any commercial undertaking, business or enterprise of whatever form of any person or body of persons (corporate or unincorporate) and carry out or enter into any activity, whether mentioned in this Act or not, which prior to such taking over or acquisition was carried out by, and for the purpose of, that undertaking, business or enterprise.

(2) The powers conferred on the Corporation under subsection (1) shall be in addition to and not in derogation of any of the rights, powers, liberties, privileges and benefits conferred on the Corporation by this Act or any other written law.

(3A) Subsection (3) shall not apply to any person who is licensed under the Gas Supply Act, 1993 to supply gas to consumers through pipelines.

[Ins. Act A842]

(3B) For the purpose of subsection (3A), the terms "gas","consumers" and "pipelines" shall have the same meaning assigned to them respectively by the Gas Supply Act 1993.

[Ins. Act A613]

4. Cash payment by the Corporation.

In return for the ownership and the rights, powers, liberties and privileges vested in it by virtue of this Act, the Corporation shall make to the Government of the Federation and the Government of any relevant State such cash payment as may be agreed between the parties concerned.

5. National Petroleum Advisory Council.

(1) There shall be established a Council to be known as the National Petroleum Advisory Council consisting of such persons including those from the relevant States as the Prime Minister may appoint.

(2) It shall be the duty of the National Petroleum Advisory Council to advise the Prime Minister on national policy, interests and matters pertaining to petroleum, petroleum industries, energy resources and their utilization.

6. Prime Minister's permission required for downstream operations.

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of any other written law, no business of processing or refining of petroleum or manufacturing of petro-chemical products from petroleum, may be carried out by any person other than PETRONAS unless there is in respect of any such business a permission given by the Prime Minister.

[Am. Act A290]

(2) Any person who on the commencement of this Act is carrying on any business referred to in subsection (1) may continue to do so but shall, not later than six months from the date of the commencement of this Act, apply in writing to the Prime Minister for his permission referred to in subsection (1).

(3) Subsection (1) shall apply to any business of marketing or distributing of petroleum or petro-chemical products; and any person who on the commencement of this subsection is carrying on any such business may continue to do so but shall, not later than six months from the date of commencement of this subsection, apply in writing to the Prime Minister for his permission referred to in subsection (1).

(3A) Subsection (3) shall not apply to any person who is licensed under the Gas Supply Act 1993 to supply gas to consumers through pipelines.

(3B) For the purpose of subsection (3A), the terms "gas", "consumers" and "pipelines" shall have the same meaning assigned to them respectively by the Gas Supply Act 1993.

(4) Where the Prime Minister grants his permission under this section he may, at his discretion, impose such terms and conditions as he may deem fit.

(5) Any person who acts in contravention of this section or fails to comply with any term or condition of any permission granted under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding one million ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to both, and in the case of a continuing offence he shall be liable to a further fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit for each day or part of a day during which the offence continues after the first day in respect of which the conviction is recorded; and all machinery, tools, plant, buildings and other property or thing used or intended to be used in the commission of the offence and any petroleum or its products thereby obtained shall be liable to forfeiture.

(6) The Prime Minister may by notification in the Gazette exempt any business referred to in subsections (1) and (3) or any company or class of company carrying on any such business from the provisions of this section.

[Ins. Act A382]

6A. (Repealed by Act A382).

7. Power to make regulations.

The Prime Minister may make regulations for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of the Act and, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, such regulations may, in particular, provide for -

(a) the conduct of or the carrying on of -

(i) any business or service relating to the exploration, exploitation, winning or obtaining of petroleum;

(ii) any business involving the manufacture and supply of equipment used in the petroleum industry;

(iii) downstream activities and development relating to petroleum;

(b) the marketing and distribution of petroleum and its products;

(c) penalties in the form of a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both such fine and imprisonment for breach of any of the regulations and for non-compliance with any term or condition of any licence, permission or approval issued or granted under the regulations;

(d) the forfeiture of anything used or intended to be used in the commission of any such breach or non-compliance.

[Am. Act A290]

7A Delegation.

The Prime Minister may; by notification in the Gazette, delegate, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed in such notification, the exercise of any of his powers or the performance of any of his duties under this Act, other than his powers and duties under sections 3(2), 5(1) and 7, to any person described by name or office.

[Ins. Act A290]

7B. Offences by bodies of persons and by servants and agents.

(1) Where an offence against this Act or any regulations made thereunder has been committed by any company, firm, society or other body of persons, any person who at the time of the commission of the offence was a director, manager or other similar officer or a partner of the company, firm, society or other body of persons or was purporting to act in such capacity shall be deemed to be guilty of that offence.

(2) Whenever it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that a contravention of the provisions of this Act or any regulations made thereunder has been committed by any clerk, servant or agent when acting in the course of his employment the principal shall also be liable for such contravention and to the penalty provided therefor:

Provided that nothing in this section shall be deemed to exempt the liability of the clerk, servant or agent in respect of any penalty provided by this Act or any regulations made thereunder for any contravention proved to have been committed by him.

[Ins. Act A290]

7C. Jurisdiction of courts.

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other written law to the contrary, a Sessions Court or, in Sabah and Sarawak, a Court of a Magistrate of the First Class, shall have jurisdiction to try any offence under this Act or any regulations made thereunder and on conviction to impose the full penalty therefor.

[Ins. Act A290]

8. Saving.

(1) Save for section 14 thereof, the Petroleum Mining Act 1966 shall not apply to the Corporation.

(2) In the application of section 14 of that Act to the Corporation, any reference to the licensee shall be construed as a reference to the Corporation, and any reference to the exercising of any rights contained in the licence shall be construed as a reference to the exercising of the rights, powers, liberties and privileges vested in the Corporation by virtue of section 2 (1) of this Act.

[Am. Act A290]

9. Transitional.

(1) Any exploration licences issued and any petroleum agreements entered into pursuant to the Petroleum Mining Act 1966, and any licences, leases and agreements issued or made under any written law in force relating to prospecting, exploration or mining for petroleum shall continue to be in force for a period of six months from the date of the coming into force of this Act or for such extended period as the Prime Minister may allow.

(2) Where the six months' period has elapsed and no extension thereto under subsection (1) is allowed, the licences, leases or agreements mentioned in that subsection shall determine or cease to have effect and there shall be paid to the person whose rights under the licence, lease or agreement have been so determined, adequate compensation which may be in the form of a single sum or in the form of periodical payments of money or in such other form as may be determined by the Federal Government or under any arrangement agreed upon between such person and other person designated by the Federal Government.

[Am. Act A290]

10. DEFINITION.

For the Purpose of this Act, the expression "petroleum" means any mineral oil or relative hydrocarbon and natural gas existing in its natural condition and casinghead petroleum spirit including bituminous shales and other stratified deposits from which oil can be extracted.

[Ins Act A382]

SCHEDULE

(Section 2 (2))

GRANT OF RIGHTS, POWERS, LIBERTIES AND PRIVILEGES IN RESPECT OF PETROLEUM

I,............................................................................................................. ..................................................................................................... on behalf of the Government of.............................................. on this..........day of...........................................197.........., hereby grant in perpetuity and convey to and vest in PETRONAS the ownership in and the exclusive rights, powers, liberties and privileges of exploring, exploiting winning and obtaining petroleum whether lying onshore or offshore of Malaysia. The grant, conveyance and vesting made hereunder shall be irrevocable and shall enure for the benefit of PETRONAS and its successor.

IN WITNESS whereof I on behalf of the Government of .......................................................hereunto set my hand the day and year first herein above written.

............................................ ............................................

on behalf of the Government of ............................................

Witness's signature:

............................................ ..............................................

I,..................................................................................................... on behalf of PETRONAS hereby accept the grant, conveyance and the vesting made above.

............................................. ............................................ ............................................

Witness's signature:

........................................... ............................................

Done at .....................................................this ............................... day of ............................... 197 ..........

Malaysia's Brain Drain

Written by Mariam Mokhtar
Thursday, 18 February 2010 It's Not Just Politics and Racial Discrimination.

Malaysia's brain drain appears to be picking up speed. According to a recent parliamentary report, 140,000 left the country, probably for good, in 2007. Between March 2008 and August 2009, that figure more than doubled to 305,000 as talented people pulled up stakes, apparently disillusioned by rising crime, a tainted judiciary, human rights abuses, an outmoded education system and other concerns.

The general assumption is that Chinese and Indians form the majority of those abandoning the country of their birth because ethnic Malays consider them pendatang – aliens in a Malay land, regardless of how long they have been in the country. However, increasing numbers of Malays have already emigrated as well, or are seriously thinking it, dismayed by corrupt practices as well as the rigid confines of Islam and the rise of fundamentalism embodied in the revelation on Wednesday by Home Minister Hishammuddin Tun Hussein that three women had been caned in Kajang Prison in Selangor on Feb. 9 for having had illicit sex under shariah law.

In 2000, according to figures compiled in 2007, 40 percent of Malaysian emigrants headed for Singapore – at the same time Singaporeans are headed somewhere else. By one estimate, (Singaporeans Seek Asylum Elsewhere, Asia Sentinel, Jan. 7) the number who put the Lion City behind them is as high as 15 percent of annual births. In 2006, the Transport Minister, Raymond Lim, expressed concern that 53 percent of Singaporean teens would consider emigration. One website survey put Singapore's average outflow at 26.11 migrants per 1,000 citizens, the second highest in the world - next only to East Timor (51.07).

Of the other émigrés, 30 percent go to OECD countries (Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada and Britain) 20 percent to Asian countries (Brunei, Philippines, Indonesia) and the rest of the world (10 percent). Malaysian Employers Federation executive director, Shamsuddin Bardan, said in an interview that 785,000 Malaysians are working overseas. Unofficially, the figure is well over 1 million.

Nor are people all that is leaving. Asia Sentinel reported on Jan.11 (Malaysia's Disastrous Capital Flight) that there has been an exodus of money from Malaysia on a scale which surpasses that which occurred during the Asian crisis. The decline is also reflected in a sudden decline in base money supply – even while, thanks to Bank Negara, broader M2 has continued to grow modestly.

A major problem is the flight of graduates. As early as 2004, former Premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was becoming concerned, pointing out that as many as many as 30,000 thought to be working in foreign countries, many of whom had held scholarships in top universities from the Malaysian government but chose to stay overseas at the end of their studies. Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad demanded that other countries pay Malaysia for having seduced them to stay, " since, by right, the graduates' training and knowledge should be called intellectual property."

The typical reasons are well-documented: improved employment and business prospects, higher salaries, better working environments, greater chances of promotion and a relatively superior quality of life.

Three Malay women put a personal face on statistics in conversation with Asia Sentinel, sharing their decisions to emigrate. Two are graduates of overseas universities, the third is from a local school. Their decisions to leave were made, they say, after a lot of soul searching. But for these women, money and economic incentives were not the end-all. Their names have been changed to protect them.Read more.

Shame On You

About my brother judge Augustine Paul

When the infamous Judge Jeffreys died ignominiously in 1689 at the age of 41 in the Tower of London where he was imprisoned, no one in freedom loving England mourned his death.

Judge Jeffreys died in obscurity as a judge. But his name will forever be remembered in infamy for his part as the judge in the Bloody Assize. Likewise, the name of judge Augustine Paul (left) will remain in obscurity as a judge, but his name will be remembered as a bad and evil judge because of his monstrous behaviour on the bench when he tried former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim.

This obnoxious man never gave Anwar a fair trial. William Shakespeare once wrote in one of his plays, "The evil that men do lives after them": Julius Caesar, Act 3, scene 2.

There is another quotation which tells us that an unjust judge is unfit to be called a judge. The quotation fits Augustine to a T. It reads, "When the judge is unjust, he is no longer a judge but a transgressor": Giosue` Borsi in 'A Soldier's Confidence with God', The Macmillan Treasury of Relevant Quotations.

I remember that when Augustine tried Anwar in the infamous "mattress" case - up to this day, we still do not understand why the mattress was carried in and out of court daily during the long trial - the judge was surrounded by bodyguards. He must have known that he had done wrong for him to fear for his life.

During the days of the Emergency - I was a schoolboy then - many communists were tried before stern but fair-minded colonial judges for armed insurgency and they dealt out the death sentence to those whom they convicted almost routinely. Yet the judges were not protected. The judges had no bodyguards and their home and family were unprotected..

The communists killed Sir Henry Gurney and many expatriate police officers. But they never touched a single judge. No judge was ever threatened nor harmed by the insurgents. But a coward like Augustine needed protection.

There was a time when Sheikh Daud Ismail and I were the High Court judges who were hearing criminal cases in Kuala Lumpur . One morning, the late Mohtar Abdullah, who was then the head of criminal prosecutions in the Attorney-General's Chambers, telephoned me to offer me a police bodyguard for my protection because two prisoners who had been severely punished by me for armed robbery had escaped from prison and he had reason to believe that one of them was looking for me.

I turned down the offer because I have never acted unjustly or unfairly as a judge so that there was no reason for me to fear reprisal from those who had been punished by me. In my 21 years as a judge until I retired in the year 2000, I was never harmed nor threatened by those criminals who had received harsh sentences from me.

Once in a while, those who had been punished by me have accosted me. They meant me no harm. They just wanted to tell me that they have served their term and to shake my hand. They wanted to show to their family members that they could approach a judge to speak to him cordially.

I could not recognise any of them, of course - so many had passed through my hand. But the ex-convicts bore no grudge against me even though I had imposed the harshest sentences on them because they knew that they had been given a fair hearing.

Now you know that an unjust judge is not a judge but a transgressor. Augustine was a transgressor and so was Judge Jeffreys before him. This is what I wrote in the Preface to the second edition of my book, 'How to Judge the Judges':

"The epitome of justice is a fair trial and for the presiding judge to do justice according to law. These are the twin pillars of justice. One would never tire of stressing this point; this is what the rule of law is all about.

For there to be a fair trial the presiding judge must be fair-minded and he must administer justice according to law. If the judge does not do that, then justice has failed. There will be injustice. The judge must be impartial himself and in his court he must manifest an appearance of impartiality - for justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done."

With that definition of justice, the common man can judge the judges. It is so easy to be a judge. All that you need to be one is to be fair-minded yourself and to show by your conduct and behaviour in court that you deal out impartial justice - for justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. The other attribute of a judge is to administer justice according to law.

It is so easy to be a judge, yet this country, since chief justice Abdul Hamid Omar, has not been able to appoint judges with such simple attributes. There are exceptions, of course - there are a few good judges left but they are few and far between as can be seen by the antics of the main body of judges in the cases of the Perak crisis.

Like two peas in a pod

At page 8 of my book, ibid, I wrote:

"The first Anwar Ibrahim trial (Public Prosecutor v Anwar bin Ibrahim [1999] 2 AMR 2017): the so-called "corruption trial" had attracted much adverse worldwide attention. It was not the judgment that was criticised (it could even be impeccable) but the way the trial was conducted which attracted so much adverse comment and disapproval from television broadcast abroad and from the international press.

The remarks and behaviour from the bench: like when the lawyers for the defence were threatened with contempt of court, in fact one of the defence lawyers was actually charged with the offence, and with the judge being difficult with the witnesses and counsel for the defence at almost every turn of the trial, gave the impression to the media and to those who were there that the judge was one-sided. It did not matter that the judge thought he was not.

As Lord Devlin observed, "The judge who gives the right judgment while appearing not to do so may be thrice blessed in heaven, but on earth he is no use at all" Patrick Devlin, The Judge, p 3). Mr Justice Augustine Paul, like the infamous Judge Jeffreys before him, by the manner in which he had conducted the trial and his behaviour on the bench, brought ignominy and embarrassment to the reputation of the courts of this country. The decision could be set aside for apparent bias: see Ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No 2) [1999] 1 All ER 577 (HL(E))."

The perpetuation of injustice by him while on the bench was Augustine's besetting sin. This is how I put it at page 7 of my book:

"The judge who does not appear to be fair; who does not appear to be impartial, is useless to the judicial process. Even though he has given the right judgment, the judge who does not appear to be fair at the hearing leaves behind a sense of injustice to the losing party who will feel that he has been singled out by the judge's show of partiality. Such a judge is useless to the judicial process and gives a bad name to the courts of his country."

Like two peas in a pod, Augustine's reflection - his mirror image - was the infamous Judge Jeffreys before him. Both men were unjust and their besetting sin was the perpetration of injustice.

The nemesis of Judge Jeffreys was the trial of Alice Lisle. Just as the nemesis of judge Augustine was the trial of Anwar. On page 10 of my book, I wrote, "...the trial of Dame Alice Lisle and Judge Jeffreys' infamous conduct of pressuring an unwilling jury to convict her brought infamy to his name down through the centuries to this day."

In the book 'What Next in the Law', Butterworths, London , 1982, pp. 40, 41, Lord Denning tells this story:

"I was surprised to find how few, even in my county of Hampshire , had heard of Alice Lisle. Everyone has heard of Judge Jeffreys and the Bloody Assize. But they seem to be unaware of the way in which he browbeat the jury consisting, we are told, of the "best quality of the country".

All that the little old lady had done was to let a man called Hicks - a non-conformist minister - have a night's lodging in her house near Fordingbridge. She did not know that he had been in the rebellion on the side of the Duke of Monmouth. He only stayed one night and left the next day. But she was charged with high treason.

Now there was in law no case against her. And Jeffreys should have known it: because Hicks had not been tried, nor had he been convicted of treason. She took the legal objection herself that the principal traitor ought first to have been convicted "because, peradventure, he might afterwards be acquitted as innocent after she had been condemned for harbouring him."

But Jeffreys would have none of it. He summed up furiously against her. The jury retired. It is said by almost all the contemporary authorities that:

"Thrice did the jury refuse to find a verdict of guilty and thrice did Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys send them back to reconsider their verdict."

The jury remained long in consultation. He then sent a messenger to tell them that, if they did not instantly return, he would adjourn the court and lock them up all night. So they came back. But not to find Alice Lisle guilty. They said that they doubted whether the charge was made out. Then Jeffreys said:

Jeffreys: The circumstances and management of the thing is as full proof as can be. I wonder what it is you doubt of.

Lisle: My Lord, I hope...

Jeffreys: You must not speak now.

So she was not allowed to speak anymore. The jury laid their heads together for near a quarter of an hour. I am sorry to say that they gave in. They did not hold out as good men of Hampshire should have done. They found her guilty. Trial by jury had failed because of an unjust judge. Jeffreys then pronounced sentence on her that she be burnt alive."

According to 'Macaulay History of England ', Vol 1, p 314, the clergy of Winchester Cathedral remonstrated with the chief justice and her sentence was commuted. She was put to death on a scaffold.

NH CHAN is a former Court of Appeal judge famous for his 'All is not well in the House of Denmark ' comment regarding judicial corruption. He was referring to the Kuala Lumpur High Court's commercial division located in Wisma Denmark . The quote is based on Shakespeare's 'Something is rotten in the state of Denmark '. He now lives in Ipoh . This is an edited version of his article.

Britons among the ugliest people

Britons among the "ugliest people", dating site says

Wed Nov 11, 2009 8:49pm GMT

Email | Print |

Share

| Single Page

[-] Text [+]

LONDON (Reuters) - Britons are among the ugliest people in the world, according to a dating website that says it only allows "beautiful people" to join.

Fewer than one in eight British men and just three in 20 women who have applied to BeautifulPeople.com have been accepted, an emailed statement from the website showed.

Existing members of the "elite dating site" rate how attractive potential members are over a 48 hour period, after applicants upload a recent photo and personal profile.

Swedish men have proved the most successful, with 65 percent being accepted, while Norwegian women are considered the most beautiful with 76 percent accepted, the website said.

The way that BeautifulPeople.com accepts new members is simple. A potential member applies with a photo and a brief profile. Over 48 hours, existing members of the opposite sex vote whether or not to admit them, the site said.

Options are: "Yes definitely," "Hmm yes, O.K," "Hmm no, not really" and "No definitely not."

The site was founded in 2002 in Denmark and went live across the globe last month. Since then, the site has rejected nearly 1.8 million people from 190 countries, admitting just 360,000 new members.

"I would say Britain is stumbling because they don't spend as much time polishing up their appearance and they are letting themselves down on physical fitness," Beautiful People managing director Greg Hodge said. "Next to Brazilian and Scandinavian beauties, British people just aren't as toned or glamorous."

Only the male Russian and Polish applicants fared worse than British men, although Russian women had a 44 percent acceptance rate. Polish women did not appear in the table. Continued...

American Hypocrisy:Come Hell Or High Water

Roman Polanski's Arrest: Why the French Are Outraged

By BRUCE CRUMLEY / PARIS Bruce Crumley / Paris – 2 hrs 28 mins ago

Although the cultural divide between Europe and the U.S. has narrowed over the years, the legal fate of director Roman Polanski shows there are still major differences. Polanski's arrest in Switzerland on Sept. 26 was greeted with satisfaction in the U.S., where authorities hope he will face sentencing for having sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977. Europeans, meanwhile, are shocked and dismayed that an internationally acclaimed artist could be jailed for such an old offense.

"To see him thrown to the lions and put in prison because of ancient history - and as he was traveling to an event honoring him - is absolutely horrifying," French Culture Minister FrÉdÉric Mitterrand said after Polanski was arrested upon arrival in Switzerland to attend the Zurich Film Festival, where he was to receive a lifetime achievement award. "There's an America we love and an America that scares us, and it's that latter America that has just shown us its face." In comments that appeared to be directed at Swiss and American authorities to free Polanski, Mitterrand added that both he and French President Nicolas Sarkozy hoped for a "rapid resolution to the situation which would allow Roman Polanski to rejoin his family as quickly as possible." (See the top 25 crimes of the century.)

Polanski, who won an Academy Award in 2003 for directing The Pianist, admitted to having unlawful sexual intercourse with 13-year-old Samantha Geimer as part of a plea bargain in which other charges - including drugging and raping the girl - were dropped. However, fearful that the Los Angeles judge in the case was about to renege on the deal and slap him with a long prison sentence, Polanski fled the U.S. in 1978 and never returned. He has spent the past 30 years in France, where he has raised a family and continued his career unhindered. That is, until Saturday. Swiss police seized Polanski on an international warrant issued by U.S. authorities in 2005 and, under bilateral treaties, will now extradite him to the U.S. unless barred from doing so by Swiss courts. (Read "Redeeming Roman Polanski.")

France never complied with the arrest warrant because its laws prohibit the extradition of its citizens to other countries. At the same time, many people in France have over the years downplayed the gravity of Polanski's crime because of his immense talent and artistry as a director. The 76-year-old, who was born in France, has increasingly been seen as the victim of an obsessive U.S. justice system that is ready to pluck him up and drag him off to prison at any moment. Those feelings were reinforced by the 2008 documentary Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, in which filmmaker Marina Zenovich argues that the judge and prosecutor in the case may have engaged in legal misconduct in obtaining Polanski's guilty plea. The film also contains an appeal by Geimer, the victim, for Polanski to be pardoned - leaving his European supporters perplexed as to why U.S. officials wouldn't finally close the book on him. (Read "More Sex, Please, We're French.")

Read more.....