By Neena Bhandari
Sydney : (IANS) To dig deep into what went wrong with Indian doctor Muhammad Haneef’s case, his lawyers say the new Australian Labor government may need to consider inquiries into both the Migration Act and the controversial counter-terrorism laws.
According to Australian Associated Press, Prime Minister-elect Kevin Rudd has flagged a judicial inquiry into the failed prosecution case against the former Gold Coast registrar, who was incarcerated for three weeks after being charged with supporting a terrorist organisation by “recklessly” giving his mobile phone SIM card to people planning the foiled London and Glasgow bomb attacks.
Haneef’s lawyer, Peter Russo, told the National Press Club, “It’s been suggested that a lot of the legislation that was introduced in relation to the government’s reaction to terrorism, really came about by stealth.”
“My understanding is the inquiry, when it was first mooted… was an inquiry about the previous immigration minister (Kevin Andrews). That would be very limited,” Russo said.
“If there’s going to be an inquiry into how all this unfolded. I think you could set up two inquiries, an inquiry into the Migration Act on its own, and then you could have an inquiry into the terrorism legislation and the Commonwealth criminal code,” he added.
The Australian Labor Party had until recently basically towed the Howard government’s line in the Haneef case, which has exposed the draconian nature of the anti-terrorism law, the Migration Act and the Crimes Act.
But with more embarrassing emails published before the election, under the Freedom of Information laws, which showed there was a “secret plan” to keep Haneef behind bars, the ALP had renewed its call for a judicial inquiry into the Indian doctor’s case.
Rudd had told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, “… I think there is a mounting case in terms of ministerial mismanagement of this matter, we must get to the bottom of it, and therefore a judicial inquiry is appropriate. I’ve said again, if we form the next government of Australia, there will be one. We need to get to the bottom of this.”
The emails had said, “Contingencies for containing Mr Haneef and detaining him under the Migration Act, if it was the case he was granted bail on Monday, were in place as per arrangements today.”
The charges were later dropped and Haneef returned to his family in Bangalore after Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews cancelled his 457 work visa.
Haneef’s legal team is continuing the legal battle to have his 457 work visa reinstated. Russo is keen for a proper conclusion to the Federal Court appeal lodged by the former government against the decision to return Haneef’s visa.
According to media reports here, Haneef’s solicitor Stephen Keim says he could be struck off the Bar because of two complaints made to the Queensland Legal Services Commission (QLSC). A Queensland solicitor and Australian Federal Police Commissioner (AFP) Mick Keelty have complained about information being leaked to the media.
Meanwhile, The Australian newspaper’s journalist Hedley Thomas has won the country’s top journalism prize, the Gold Walkley Award, for a series of news stories exposing the faux pas in the Haneef case.
Thomas has criticised the AFP for pursuing the lawyers, who leaked the information that allowed him to write his award-winning articles.