Bring David Hicks home (from Guantanamo) before Christmas!

Latest Hicks setback exposes injustice: Labor
24, 2007 - 12:36PM/SMH

Australian terror suspect David Hicks has lost an eleventh hour bid to halt Monday's appearance in a Guantanamo Bay courtroom.

Labor says the refusal by one tier of the United States' legal system to delay Hicks' trial is confirmation that the military commission process is unjust.

Lawyers for the Australian Guantanamo Bay inmate had asked that his military commission be suspended until the Supreme Court decides whether Guantanamo Bay detainees have the right to challenge their detention in US courts.

An appeals court ruled last month that they do not have the right.

In the law that set up those commissions, Congress stripped federal courts of jurisdiction to get involved in detainee cases.

Lawyers for many detainees challenged the law but a federal appeals court upheld it.

The Supreme Court has not said whether it will take the case.

US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly yesterday said she had no jurisdiction in the case.

Labor's attorney-general spokesman Senator Joe Ludwig said in a statement today: "This outcome reinforces just how unjust the military commission process is.

"The US judge confirmed that David Hicks as a non-US citizen had no constitutional rights.

"Attorney-General Philip Ruddock must now explain why he's happy for Australian citizens to be treated differently and have fewer rights to other citizens."

The US military applauded Judge Kollar-Kotelly's ruling.

"David Hicks deserves his day in court,'' Pentagon spokesman, Commander JD Gordon, told AAP.

"We're pleased about the court's decision to deny the defence's motion."

Hicks was captured in Afghanistan in 2001 and faces charges of providing material support for terrorism. He allegedly fought with the Taliban against US-led forces.

He is scheduled to appear before a military commission tomorrow.

His father, Terry Hicks from Adelaide, has flown out of Australia to be at the hearing.

Meanwhile the White House says US President George W Bush will probably not shut down the Guantanamo Bay prison before leaving office in January 2009.

Asked whether the facility, a lightning rod for international criticism from rights groups and even US allies, would close before Bush's term ends, spokesman Tony Snow replied: "I doubt it. No, I don't think it will."

Most countries with citizens held at the US military base in Cuba have told Washington they do not want them back, and moving them to the US mainland would pose legal headaches, Snow told reporters.

Moreover, the US has only just opened trials by military commission for some of the roughly 400 detainees, some of whom have been held at the base since the late 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan, he said.

"We have just begun a legal procedure that does take time," said Snow.

"It's highly unlikely that you can dispense with all those cases between now and the end of the administration."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/latest-hicks-setback-exposes-injustice-labor/2007/03/24/1174597934633.html

Anxiety over visit to captive son in Cuba
Penelope Debelle
March 25, 2007/Sunday AGE

David HICKS will definitely plead not guilty in a US military courtroom in Cuba tomorrow to the sole remaining charge against him of providing material support for terrorism.

Lead lawyer Josh Dratel told The Sunday Age Hicks would deny the charge at tomorrow's preliminary hearing, his first public appearance in almost three years.

Hicks, 31, who cannot be photographed under the military rules controlling Guantanamo Bay detainees but may be sketched by a court artist, is expected to appear in the suit issued to him when he appeared in August 2004 to deny three earlier charges that have since been dropped.

Hicks' father Terry also requested that his son, whose appearance has become increasingly unkempt after his comb and razor were removed by guards, have a shave and haircut before meeting family members tomorrow.

"I said it as a joke but with a bit of meaning behind it," Terry Hicks said.

Hicks, who suffers from a chronic stomach complaint and is reportedly overweight and unfit, with long hair and a straggly beard, was last week issued with an electric razor in preparation for his courtroom appearance, his lawyer Major Michael Mori said.

The arraignment hearing involves reading the charges against the accused and asking him to plead.

Mr Dratel, who will be assisted by Major Mori and Adelaide lawyer David McLeod, yesterday accused the Australian Government of playing politics by suggesting Hicks could plead guilty and be home by the end of the year.

"Just so it is clear, there is no deal on the table that would have Hicks returned to Australia by the end of the year," Mr Dratel said. "There is no deal on the table that has been offered to him. That is something the Howard Government has been promoting simply to try to squelch this as an issue."

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said earlier this month that a plea bargain - an agreement under which Hicks would plead guilty in return for a lighter sentence - would be a good option for all concerned. "If Mr Hicks and his advisers felt that it was appropriate that there be a plea bargain, I imagine the issue could be dealt with very quickly," Mr Ruddock said.

However, Mr Dratel said, it was a hypothetical question because there was no offer. "We don't have an offer that's going to get David home by the end of the year," he said. "There are no negotiations ongoing right now."

Hicks will be briefly reunited at Guantanamo Bay tomorrow with his father Terry and sister Stephanie during two private meetings agreed to by US authorities after a request from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

At Adelaide airport yesterday morning, Terry Hicks said he was apprehensive about the state of his son's mental and physical health after more than five years at Guantanamo Bay, including a year in virtual isolation.

"He will be changed. He is going to look a lot older, I would say," Terry Hicks said.... <cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/anxiety-over-visit-to-captive-son-in-cuba/2007/03/24/1174597953714.html?page=fullpage

If his sentence is 5 years, then release him immediately (that's how it's currently done).

By the way...I doubt he's rid himself of his militant islamic beliefs (more likely they have only hardened). The danger in Hicks is his ideology. As long as that exists, he will always be a danger to the West (perhaps just the US, but probably Australia as well).

And I can think of more preferable (to me) measures than jail time. Put a tracer on him that can't be taken off, allow him back into Australia, but he is not allowed to live anywhere where there is a Islamic community (ie most likely a small town to middling city), and ban him from going near shops that sell the ingredients for explosives etc. It may be restrictive, but once someone has proven they are willing to go down the path of militant islam, I don't think it unreasonable.

I'd say he's already been micro-chipped, Vikkor.

I'd also hazard a guess that he'll head straight home, and forget about being an Islamist. He may remain a Moslem, but his fighting days are over.

My understanding is that he'd renounced his Islamic faith some time ago & has had little to do with the other prisoners at Guantanamo & their religious practises. In any case, with so much of his time spent in solitary confinement, there wouldn't have been much opportunity to be involved, even if he still wanted to. I also reckon he'll leave Guantanamo Bay in not exactly wonderful shape, physically & mentally & doubt that he'll be a danger to anyone. He's more likely to be a political embarrassment to the current governments of the US & Oz than anything else.

Always a possibility

Like many others in Australia, I'm holding my breath right now, waiting for the outcome of this first hearing.

There has been much speculation in the media today about a possible/likely plea bargain. Should he & his lawyers hold out on principle?

Look at it this way:

We all know that this is a bullshit process.

We all know that a "guilty" verdict must & will be found, as a face-saving outcome for the US & Australian governments. No other option would be acceptable to those who hold the power.

So maybe (as I've argued before) David Hicks could be forgiven for pleading guilty the least damaging of the "guilty" options available, to save his sanity & his health. And get the hell out of that terrible place as fast as possible?

The thing is, the US & Australian governments will come out of this sad affair with very little respect or credibility intact, anyway. Justice is simply not possible in this situation.

Good luck, David.:


Hicks prepared to bargain
Mark Coultan
March 26, 2007 - 7:08PM/SMH

Speculation is mounting that David Hicks is about to do a deal with US prosecuting authorities to plead guilty to terrorism charges in exchange for being able to return to Australia.

His Australian lawyer David McLeod refused to comment on a possible new plea deal after a series of meetings on the eve of his arraignment on terrorism charges, but his comments suggest that after five years of imprisonment, serious negotiations are underway.

"Obviously all the options have to be discussed, from 'not guilty and tough it out', through to 'how do I get out of here at the earliest opportunity?'

"In those discussions you would expect a number of options which his lawyers are going through with him, and he is considering. At this stage, they are all subject to consideration," he said.

Cryptic comments by Foreign Minister Alexander Downer suggested plea bargain negotiations may be under way.

"Plea bargains are a matter for the prosecution and defence and the convening authority," he told reporters.

"They are not for me to talk about publicly. Whatever I know about that, that's where it will stay, inside my head." ..... <cont>


http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/hicks-prepared-to-bargain/2007/03/26/1174761313448.html?page=fullpage

Msolga, without linking to anything, I'm with Hicks in claiming that he won't receive a fair and just trial.

If I was running this country, (which I never ever aspired to, mind you), I would be withdrawing all support for American overlord tactics in the ME, and limiting the activities of US military within my country.

It worked for New Zealand.

As widely anticipated, David Hicks has pleaded guilty, a short time ago.

Now to see the terms of the plea agreement, to be presented later today by his lawyers. Then we'll know how much more time will have to be served, expected to be Australian prison, thank god!

So, hopefully, before too long, David Hicks will have seen the last of Guantanamo Bay & the US military "justice" system.

But you can bet, many, many Australians are not going top forget this outrageous episode for quite some time!:

Hicks enters guilty plea


Last Update: Tuesday, March 27, 2007. 11:00am (AEST)

Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks has agreed to plead guilty before a United States military tribunal to a charge of providing material support to terrorists.

His American military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, entered the plea for him.

Hicks had earlier refused to enter a plea, but his lawyers approached the presiding judge with the change of plans in a reconvened session of his preliminary military commission.

Hicks answered, "Yes, sir," when the judge asked if that was in fact his plea.

Hicks would have faced possible life imprisonment if he had pleaded not guilty.

The judge ordered the prosecutors and defence lawyers to draw up a plea agreement by 4:00pm local time, which is expected to spell out what sentence he would serve.

It is expected there will now be a lighter prison sentence for Hicks, which he will serve in an Australian jail.

The plea came at a hastily arranged hearing a day after defence lawyers said Hicks was weighing a possible plea deal that could get him out of Guantanamo Bay, where he has been imprisoned for more than five years.

The chief prosecutor for the tribunals had said previously that a 20-year sentence would be a "reasonable" benchmark for Hicks.

It was not clear if the military authorities would take into account his time served at the Guantanamo prison.

The plea followed a three-hour hearing, which was supposed to clear the way for a trial against Hicks before a special US military tribunal.

The hearing began in sensational circumstances earlier with two of Hicks's civilian lawyers barred from representing him.

The presiding judge, Marine Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Coleman, questioned the eligibility of two of Hicks's lawyers to appear before the commission.

One of them, United States civilian lawyer Joshua Draytel, launched a withering attack on Colonel Coleman, accusing him of making up the rules as he went along, before leaving the courtroom.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200703/s1882383.htm

Hicks pleads guilty


An artist depicts David Hicks' appearance in the US military courtroom in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, today.

March 27, 2007 - 11:25AM/the AGE

BREAKING NEWS: Australian David Hicks has pleaded guilty to a terrorism charge before a US military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay.

Hicks' military lawyer Major Michael Mori, entered the plea on behalf of his client, who stood sombrely beside him during a rapidly convened hearing this morning, Melbourne time.

He answered "Yes, sir,'' when the judge, Marine Colonel Ralph Kohlmann, asked if that was in fact his plea to a charge of providing material support for terrorism..

The judge ordered the prosecutors and defence lawyers to draw up a plea agreement spelling out what sentence he will serve by 6am (AEST) tomorrow.

However US military prosecutors are expected to outline the Australian's likely sentence at a press conference later today.

The chief prosecutor for the military commissions has said that a 20-year sentence would be "reasonable''. The maximum penalty for the charge is life behind bars, but Hicks is likely to receive a lighter sentence, possibly taking into account the five years he has already spent in custody.

A prisoner exchange agreement between Australia and the US means Hicks will be allowed to serve out any remaining prison time in Australia, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said today.

But Prime Minister John Howard today refused to be drawn on whether Hicks could serve part of any sentence under a control order in Australia.

A person subject to a control order could live in the community but with restrictions on travel and who may be contacted.

The Australian has been held at the US-run prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, since he was detained in Afghanistan allegedly fighting for the Taliban.

There had been growing speculation before today's hearings that Hicks could strike a deal with his military prosecutors for a lighter sentence in return for a guilty plea.

The plea came after Colonel Kohlmann ordered a hurried reconvening of the commission, which followed a fiery three-and-a-half-hour hearing at which Hicks reserved his plea.

At the initial hearing, Hicks said he was "shocked" when Col. Kohlmann disqualified two of his legal counsellors, one of who accusing the judge of making up the rules.

Hicks appeared at the hearings under tight security.

The 31-year-old is the first "war on terror'' detainee at the US-run prison to be tried under a new law that revived the tribunals after the US Supreme Court threw out the previous system created by an order from President George Bush.

He arrived in the chamber dressed in khaki prison garb and thongs, clean-shaven and with chest-length hair. He was escorted by two uniformed, unarmed soldiers but was not wearing handcuffs or shackles.

He chose to defer his plea to a charge of lending "material support to terrorism'' to a later, undetermined date.

But what was supposed to be a routine procedural hearing turned into a tense confrontation when the military judge, Colonel Ralph Kohlmann, disqualified two civilian lawyers on the defence team.

The judge said US lawyer Joshua Dratel could only represent Hicks in the tribunal if he signed an agreement setting out the rules governing how the defence counsel could operate.

Mr Dratel refused, saying: "I can't sign a document that provides a blank cheque that draws on my ethical obligations as a lawyer.''

Mr Dratel said the tribunal system was making up rules as it went along, comparing it to the previous military commissions that were ruled illegal by the US Supreme Court in June.

"These are the same problems that plagued the last commissions, that everything is ad-hoc,'' Mr Dratel said.

A second civilian lawyer, Rebecca Snyder, was told by the judge she would have to step aside, at least for the moment, until she changed her reserve status in the military.

"I'm shocked because I just lost another lawyer,'' Hicks told the judge.

Moments before, Hicks said he was satisfied with his defence team, but would ask at a later date for more defence lawyers.

"I'm hoping to have more lawyers and paralegals to get equality with the prosecution,'' Hicks told Col. Kohlmann.

He was also declined the offer of an interpreter but told the judge that the commission may have trouble understanding him, as he spoke "Australian English".

Adelaide-born Hicks allegedly underwent training at an al-Qaeda camp in Kandahar, southern Afghanistan and volunteered to fight alongside Taliban forces during the US-led invasion.

The charge sheet does not allege Hicks fired on US troops or attacked a US target, but says he conducted surveillance on the abandoned US embassy in Kabul and met Osama bin Laden as well as accused "shoe bomber'' Richard Reid.

Previous charges of attempted murder, conspiracy and aiding the enemy have been dropped, with defence lawyers saying the move shows US authorities have a weak case.

On the eve of the hearing, one of his lawyers said Hicks was considering a possible plea deal but declined to offer more details.

His time in detention, often in virtual isolation, has taken a toll, said his Australian lawyer David McLeod.

"Today he had dark, sunken eyes and he looked very tired,'' said McLeod, after meeting Hicks for more than three hours.

Hicks had been approaching today's hearing with "some degree of trepidation'', he added.

Today's hearing was watched by Hicks' father Terry and sister Stephanie, following a scheduled hour-long visit with Hicks before proceedings began.

Hicks has grown his hair long so he can reportedly shield his eyes from light in his cell to allow him to sleep.

He has alleged he was beaten during interrogations in Afghanistan and on US naval ships before he was taken to Guantanamo in 2002.

AFP

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/hicks-enters-plea/2007/03/27/1174761414531.html?page=fullpage

It's a plea-bargain.

If you have to be incarcerated, at least find an establishment that switches off the lights after sundown.

With five plus years down, he'll be out in three or maybe two.

We don't know.

The charge usually carries a life sentence, but I'm sure li'l Johnny Howler struck a deal with CheneyDude, because his tune sure changed after that visit.

Am I the only one to notice?

Actually, I noticed that John Howard become much more interested when the polls started telling him that that David Hicks's was an important issue for Australians. And therefore an election issue!:wink:
Prior to that, he wasn't exactly concerned, to put it politely.

Interesting reading about the same event from the NY Times perspective.:

Plea of Guilty From Detainee in Guantánamo
By WILLIAM GLABERSON
Published: March 27, 2007/NYT

GUANTÁNAMO BAY, Cuba, March 26

The guilty plea by the detainee, David Hicks, was the first under a new military commission law passed by Congress in the fall after the Supreme Court struck down the Bush administration's first system for trying inmates at Guantánamo.

The guilty plea is sure to be seen by administration supporters as an affirmation of its efforts to detain and try terrorism suspects here, although the government's detention policies still face significant legal and political challenges. .... <cont>

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/27/washington/27gitmo.html?_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=all

I'm wondering about what effect blogs and forums such as this one had on our current Regina. Did Howler pay attention? Maybe.

I think all the little blogs were important on a grassroots level. Ordinary people talking about David Hicks's predicament, becoming more informed & getting very, very, angry with JH & co & the US government. And I'm certain that GetUp, in particular, had a big influence. All that activity & interest spilled over into the letters pages of the mainstream media & onto radio talkback. The newspapers realized there was huge interest out there & began regularly regularly publishing Hicks updates & stories. Major Mori generated huge interest, too & that helped enormously. When numbers Very Prominent and Respectable Australians :wink: publicly endorsed the campaign for justice & were openly critical of John Howard's handling of the Hicks case, things became very sticky for the government. I believe the loss of credibility of the US in Iraq & the "war on terrorism" (& the Australian government's uncritical support of all things Bush) was an important turning point for many Australians in how they perceived the Hicks case. And of course, this being an election year & each successive poll showing growing disapproval of how our government was handling the Hicks situation has created a certain urgency for the government to push the US for a resolution. It's certainly been an very interesting process, watching the support for David Hicks grow & cause the Oz government to so drastically change its position & finally act.

The charges against David Hicks:

http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/terrorism/hicks20207chrgs.html

Last Update: Tuesday, March 27, 2007. 9:57pm (AEST)

Hicks 'pleaded guilty to get out'

Terry Hicks says his son David pleaded guilty to supporting a terrorist organisation just to get out of Guantanamo Bay.

Mr Hicks spent several hours inside the US naval prison in Cuba with his son, who has been there for the past five years.

Terry says David has put on a great deal of weight and has puffy eyes.

He says David was hard to talk to at first but the 31-year-old began to open up during a second, more emotional meeting.

"The emotions finally took over so it's good, I don't mind shedding tears, we're all in the same boat," he said.

He says David has not been able to exercise because he is abused by other prisoners.

"The detainees yell out abuse at him and they say he's being paid by the CIA and all this sort of business to spy on them - that sort of thing," he said.

"So he's under quite a bit of stress through that. He won't go out into the exercise yards because he's been abused verbally from the rest of the detainees, so that's not good.

"We could tell by the second conversation that he was desperate, he just wanted to get out."

Terry says he doubts Australians will view his son as a terrorist. ... <cont>

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200703/s1883018.htm

Get Up?


They did a great job, methinks.



What the FACK excuses taking 5 years to do this?

Looks like David Hicks might be back in Australia before Christmas, this year:

..... Mr Downer said a prisoner-exchange agreement between Australia and the US would allow Hicks to serve out any sentence in Australia.

The US military judge has ordered prosecutors and defence lawyers to draw up a plea agreement by 6am AEST tomorrow, which is expected to spell out what sentence he would serve.

But Prime Minister John Howard today refused to be drawn on whether Hicks could serve part of any sentence under a control order in Australia.

A person subject to a control order could live in the community but with restrictions on travel and who may be contacted. ........

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/hicks-coming-home-downer/2007/03/27/1174761421183.html

I suspect he was spme sort of an idiotic, lost, wanna be terrorist, who could have well have been part of really hurting people in the end.


I have no problem with him getting some sort of just sentence.

It's the **** and legal travesty and appalling treatment that has been my beef about al this.