By Neena Bhandari, IANS
Sydney : Jailed Indian doctor Mohammad Haneef, who was sent to solitary confinement Wednesday, asserted his innocence in a stunning Australian media revelation on a day the prime ministers of the two countries spoke out on his detention that is causing diplomatic tensions.
Haneef, linked to the failed terror plot in Britain, asserted in earlier admissions to Australian police that he was a "moderate" Muslim but authorities still moved him to a correction centre where he will be in solitary confinement for 23 hours of the day.
The 27-year-old has been moved to the Wolston Correctional Centre at Richlands on the western outskirts of Brisbane after he failed to provide a surety of AU$10,000 sought Monday. He had also been asked to report to the Southport police station in Queensland thrice a week.
Haneef, arrested on July 2 while flying out to India on a one-way ticket from Brisbane, has been charged with "recklessly" giving his mobile phone SIM card to people planning the bomb attacks in London and Glasgow. He will be in solitary confinement but with access to books, radio and TV.
The development came as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said Wednesday that he hoped Australia would extend "all the facilities" under the law and the rights entitled to Haneef.
"We hope that (Australian authorities) will extend all the facilities within the law and the rights he is entitled to," Manmohan Singh told IANS on the sidelines of a book release function.
"We are in touch with the (Australian) government. The minister of external affairs is also in touch with his counterpart in the Australian government," the prime minister added.
The Australian police appeared to have been stunned by media revelations in which Haneef, whose family in Bangalore has consistently maintained that he is innocent, has been quoted as saying that he had nothing to do with the terror plot in Britain in which his two cousins have been arrested.
Australian Federal Police (AFP) Commissioner Mick Keelty said the police interview with Haneef leaked to The Australian newspaper – in which the doctor says he is a Muslim with moderate views and fears being "framed" over the SIM card he gave to his second cousin Sabeel Ahmed – has not come from police officers and it had undermined the judicial process.
In the 142-page transcript published Wednesday, Haneef told police he had never had firearms, explosives or terrorist training and had never been asked "to take part in jihad or anything that could be considered similar to jihad".
Haneef said he made repeated telephone calls to the British police to explain the SIM card issue but the calls were unanswered, and that his father-in-law had paid for his ticket to India because he didn't have any money.
Haneef's barrister Stephen Keim confirmed giving the transcript of his client's first police interview to the media and defended the move, saying he was within his legal right to do so.
But a furious Prime Minister John Howard told ABC: "I can simply say that whoever has been responsible for leaking this document is not trying to speed the course of justice. Whoever's been responsible for leaking this document is not trying to make sure that justice is done. Whoever's responsible for this is trying to frustrate the process and it should be condemned."
Federal Attorney General Philip Ruddock did not think leaking the transcript was illegal, but he was concerned.
He told ABC: "I've not given a legal opinion and I've not proffered one. I've said though that I believe that the legal profession are bound by certain ethics, and when you are taking a matter before a court you put the issues that you wish to raise before rather than seek to influence the broader discussion.
"It was inappropriate, highly unethical and the question of whether there are any consequences really depends on the parties to the proceedings."
The documents reveal that Sabeel's brother Kafeel Ahmed, who suffered 90 percent burns while driving a burning jeep in Glasgow, loaned 300 pounds to Haneef in 2004 so he could sit for a medical exam. Haneef also remained in regular contact with Sabeel after leaving Britain in September 2006.
Haneef and Sabeel had last communicated online June 26 – three days before car bombs were located in London.
Meanwhile, there is confusion about the wording of the exact charge against Haneef. Federal Attorney General Philip Ruddock was unable to put the record straight whether Haneef's giving the SIM card to his British cousin was an "intentional" or "reckless" act.
Though Commissioner Keelty Saturday had stated the specific allegation involved "recklessness rather than intention", documents used to revoke his visa, released by his lawyers, reportedly say Haneef has been charged with "intentionally" providing resources to a terrorist group and being reckless as to whether the organisation was a terrorist organisation.
Australian authorities said they were investigating a report in The Asian Age that alleged Haneef was a senior organiser for the now-banned group the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) when he was at medical school.
In Sydney, there were protests against Haneef's solitary confinement.
Authorities said that Haneef will not be allowed access to computers and will be allowed an hour's exercise time during his solitary confinement.
"He will be safely and securely managed and will be subject to an intensive management plan that sets out the details of every aspect of his daily life. He will be provided with access to his legal adviser, the official visitors scheme and the chief inspector," said Queensland Police and Corrective Services Minister Judy Spence.
Haneef's appeal seeking a judicial review of Minister for Immigration and Citizenship Kevin Andrews's decision to revoke his 457 Visa and keep him behind bars will come up in the Brisbane federal court Wednesday afternoon.
Haneef has been in custody since July 2 but was only charged Saturday, sparking growing criticism of his 12-day detention without charge.
His lawyers are expected to file an appeal in the Federal Court, seeking a judicial review of the revocation of the Indian's Visa.