David Hicks is being held at the whim of Australia, not of the US
Shameful neglect is the John Howard way
By Nicola Roxon
December 8, 2006
Tomorrow marks five years since Australian David Hicks was detained in Afghanistan. Unlike other people alleged to have committed crimes overseas, he has not been tried or convicted. He was once charged, under the initial military commission process, but when the United States Supreme Court threw out that process, the charges went with it too.
No charges have yet been laid against Hicks under the newly established military commission process, but they are expected in the future.
So the state of play leaves Hicks in solitary confinement in Guantanamo Bay, passing his fifth anniversary in detention without any sign whatsoever of when this Kafkaesque nightmare might end.
Although this is a scandalous departure from the normal processes of the rule of law, the Howard Government is deaf to pleas that it act decently and ensure either an immediate fair trial or Hicks' release into Australian custody.
Federal Labor, every state and territory attorney-general, the UK Attorney-General and Lord Chancellor, a former High Court judge and many other eminent Australians have all repeatedly and persistently raised questions about this shameful, prolonged incarceration and demanded the Howard Government take action.
This week, Liberal backbenchers have joined the long list of those in the community calling for action and we can only hope that this might, at last, force the Attorney-General and Prime Minister to rethink their position of neglect.
All that is being asked for is that the normal rules apply.
The proposition is quite simple. Every citizen needs to be assured that if they get into trouble with the law overseas, the Australian Government will always stand up for their right to a fair trial. No one can expect the Government to protect them from the consequences of their actions, but they should expect strong action and representations to demand a fair and regular process is used.
On each of these counts, the Howard Government has shamefully abdicated its responsibilities to David Hicks. The detention and military commission process is anything but ordinary - in fact, it is marred by so many irregularities that other governments, those of Britain, France, Russia, Spain and Sweden, among others, all moved quickly to claim their nationals from US custody at Guantanamo Bay.
But an Australian man has been left languishing by the Howard Government. Rather than ensure a fair process for Hicks, the Government has instead sacrificed one of its own citizens to a military commission process that no other Western country considers acceptable.
The Government asserts that Hicks cannot be prosecuted under Australian law. The Government uses this to imply that a prosecution here is a requirement of his release from US custody. But this implication is simply false. The US' own legal adviser has confirmed that prosecution at home is not required for the release of detainees.
In fact, the chief legal adviser to the US Secretary of State, John Bellinger, specifically said this to the BBC World Service on November 5. He expressly said ". . . we (the US) have not required that people be under 24-hour surveillance. What we have said is that we want countries to take responsibility for their nationals. Look, we work out a whole variety of different security assurances. I mean, in some cases a country may prosecute them, sometimes they may detain them, sometimes they just need to make sure that they are not going to pose a threat to any of the rest of us but we are not saying that people have to be, have, 24/7 surveillance."
In the same interview, Bellinger said the US had made clear it would like to return "as many people as (it) can" to other countries, but still Howard refuses to make this request.
It is clear that our laws are adequate to meet these appropriate security standards. If David Hicks is assessed to pose a security risk to the community, our laws provide for control orders that can be imposed to monitor a person's movements in proportion to the threat they pose.
There is no reason - other than a lack of political will and the stubbornness of the Attorney-General - for Hicks not to be returned to Australia immediately. Claims that Hicks' fate is out of the Government's hands are just standard Howard Government operating procedure: blame someone else.
Other countries have successfully gone in to bat for their nationals and it is shameful that Australia's reputation as a strong democracy, respecting and promoting the rule of law, is being tarnished irretrievably by this approach.
The Howard Government has an opportunity: it needs to act now, before charges are laid against Hicks under the new military commission process and before another bout of legal and political wrangling over the process begins.
Five years of shameful neglect are enough.
Nicola Roxon is the shadow attorney-general. She will speak at Federation Square from 2 pm tomorrow at the International Day of Action marking the fifth anniversary of David Hicks being held in detention.
To read the original article from The Age, click on:
The Age
By Nicola Roxon
December 8, 2006
Tomorrow marks five years since Australian David Hicks was detained in Afghanistan. Unlike other people alleged to have committed crimes overseas, he has not been tried or convicted. He was once charged, under the initial military commission process, but when the United States Supreme Court threw out that process, the charges went with it too.
No charges have yet been laid against Hicks under the newly established military commission process, but they are expected in the future.
So the state of play leaves Hicks in solitary confinement in Guantanamo Bay, passing his fifth anniversary in detention without any sign whatsoever of when this Kafkaesque nightmare might end.
Although this is a scandalous departure from the normal processes of the rule of law, the Howard Government is deaf to pleas that it act decently and ensure either an immediate fair trial or Hicks' release into Australian custody.
Federal Labor, every state and territory attorney-general, the UK Attorney-General and Lord Chancellor, a former High Court judge and many other eminent Australians have all repeatedly and persistently raised questions about this shameful, prolonged incarceration and demanded the Howard Government take action.
This week, Liberal backbenchers have joined the long list of those in the community calling for action and we can only hope that this might, at last, force the Attorney-General and Prime Minister to rethink their position of neglect.
All that is being asked for is that the normal rules apply.
The proposition is quite simple. Every citizen needs to be assured that if they get into trouble with the law overseas, the Australian Government will always stand up for their right to a fair trial. No one can expect the Government to protect them from the consequences of their actions, but they should expect strong action and representations to demand a fair and regular process is used.
On each of these counts, the Howard Government has shamefully abdicated its responsibilities to David Hicks. The detention and military commission process is anything but ordinary - in fact, it is marred by so many irregularities that other governments, those of Britain, France, Russia, Spain and Sweden, among others, all moved quickly to claim their nationals from US custody at Guantanamo Bay.
But an Australian man has been left languishing by the Howard Government. Rather than ensure a fair process for Hicks, the Government has instead sacrificed one of its own citizens to a military commission process that no other Western country considers acceptable.
The Government asserts that Hicks cannot be prosecuted under Australian law. The Government uses this to imply that a prosecution here is a requirement of his release from US custody. But this implication is simply false. The US' own legal adviser has confirmed that prosecution at home is not required for the release of detainees.
In fact, the chief legal adviser to the US Secretary of State, John Bellinger, specifically said this to the BBC World Service on November 5. He expressly said ". . . we (the US) have not required that people be under 24-hour surveillance. What we have said is that we want countries to take responsibility for their nationals. Look, we work out a whole variety of different security assurances. I mean, in some cases a country may prosecute them, sometimes they may detain them, sometimes they just need to make sure that they are not going to pose a threat to any of the rest of us but we are not saying that people have to be, have, 24/7 surveillance."
In the same interview, Bellinger said the US had made clear it would like to return "as many people as (it) can" to other countries, but still Howard refuses to make this request.
It is clear that our laws are adequate to meet these appropriate security standards. If David Hicks is assessed to pose a security risk to the community, our laws provide for control orders that can be imposed to monitor a person's movements in proportion to the threat they pose.
There is no reason - other than a lack of political will and the stubbornness of the Attorney-General - for Hicks not to be returned to Australia immediately. Claims that Hicks' fate is out of the Government's hands are just standard Howard Government operating procedure: blame someone else.
Other countries have successfully gone in to bat for their nationals and it is shameful that Australia's reputation as a strong democracy, respecting and promoting the rule of law, is being tarnished irretrievably by this approach.
The Howard Government has an opportunity: it needs to act now, before charges are laid against Hicks under the new military commission process and before another bout of legal and political wrangling over the process begins.
Five years of shameful neglect are enough.
Nicola Roxon is the shadow attorney-general. She will speak at Federation Square from 2 pm tomorrow at the International Day of Action marking the fifth anniversary of David Hicks being held in detention.
To read the original article from The Age, click on:
The Age
posted by Pax Christi @ Friday, December 08, 2006
<< Home