Bring David Hicks home (from Guantanamo) before Christmas!

..... & <still thinking out loud> what forms of accountability does a government bear for wrongful imprisonment & denial of justice in circumstances like this?

Over the past couple of days the Australian prime minister & also our attorney general have both expressed their concern & frustration with the delays.....:

Last Update: Wednesday, January 3, 2007. 9:34am (AEDT)


David Hicks. (File photo)

Senators push for delegation to visit Hicks

Australian Democrats Senator Natasha Stott Despoja wants the Federal Government to support a cross-party delegation to visit Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks.

Senator Stott Despoja and another South Australian Senator, Labor's Linda Kirk, are among a group of parliamentarians who will seek to visit Mr Hicks this year.

The terrorism suspect will next week begin his sixth year of detention at the US military facility and is yet to be charged.

Senator Stott Despoja says similar delegations from other countries have visited the facility.

"Why is it that the United Kingdom and the United States who don't have constituents in Guantanamo Bay, why have they had cross-party delegations visit Guantanamo Bay?" she said.

"Isn't it time we had a cross-party delegation of Australian politicians to visit our constituent David Hicks?"

Senator Stott Despoja says the Australian has the right to be represented by his local senators.

"His defence team is quite willing for us to visit him in Guantanamo Bay, yet Senator Kirk's application has been rejected in the past," she said.

"We will be attempting to seek permission again this year to ensure that we have access to a man who is one of our constituents."

Mr Hicks, originally from Adelaide, has been held at Guantanamo Bay since 2002.

The convert to Islam was captured in Afghanistan where he allegedly fought alongside the ruling Taliban against US-led forces who invaded after the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001.

The US charged him with conspiracy, attempted murder by an unprivileged belligerent and aiding the enemy.

But the charges were dropped earlier this year, after the US Supreme Court ruled it was unlawful for the US military commission to try Mr Hicks.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200701/s1820738.htm

Couldn't have put it better, myself. A letter to the AGE editor today responding to Howard & Ruddock's expressions of concern about the delays in bringing David Hicks to trial.:

Concern for Hicks smacks of hypocrisy

PHILIP Ruddock's belated admission that five years of detention without trial for David Hicks was "unreasonable" and "inappropriate" ( The Age, 3/1) is not only a gross understatement, it smacks of hypocrisy given the way the Howard Government has simply abandoned him.

While the Attorney-General has spent the past five years seeking "assurances" from the US that David Hicks be tried "expeditiously", Britain, France, Spain, Canada, Russia and Afghanistan have all successfully secured the release of their citizens held in US custody for trial back home. David Hicks remains in Guantanamo Bay precisely because the Government refuses to demand that he be returned home to receive a fair trial.

At issue here is the Howard Government's abysmal failure in its basic duty of care to one of our own overseas. By failing to protect the basic rights of an Australian citizen who continues to be denied the due process of law, it has failed to fulfil its own end of the bargain when it comes to Australian citizenship. Quick to demand that all citizens pledge loyalty to Australia, this Government has shown absolutely no loyalty to David Hicks.

Given that nothing has changed in the Government's position, Mr Ruddock's tepid observations will offer little comfort to Hicks or his family. It's time to bring him home.

Maria Vamvakinou, federal member for Calwell (ALP)

The US Government has deprived him of 6 years of the prime of his life. This is time that can never be given back. He should be released and those responsible for holding him should be held accountable. The entire facility should be shut down. There was once a time in which the US would demand sanctions against other countries because of their human rights abuses. Now we are the ones doing the abusing.

Bump and bump.

Humans are losing basic respect for eachother. It sucks the big one. No doubt.

Whatchagonnadoaboutit?

US moving on new Hicks charges
Sarah Smiles, Canberra
January 5, 2007/the AGE

THE United States is inching closer towards prosecuting David Hicks, with the establishment of a new military commission predicted to begin trials later this year.

Regulations for the commission are being drafted by US government agencies and are due to be presented to Congress in mid-January, the Office of Military Commissions has confirmed.

"After everyone has time to look at the rules . . . and make sure everything is in line, then I would anticipate charges coming soon after that," said Major Beth Kubala, a spokeswoman for the office.

Major Kubala said Hicks was likely to be in the first group of terror suspects charged from Guantanamo Bay, the US military prison in Cuba where he has been held without trial since he was captured in Afghanistan five years ago. ... <cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/us-moving-on-new-hicks-charges/2007/01/04/1167777222019.html

Hicks' father sceptical of possible new charges
January 4, 2007/the AGE

Terry Hicks, father of accused terrorist David Hicks, fears fresh charges that may be laid against his son later this month are a tactic to keep the case out of the courts.

The US Office of Military Commissions confirmed today that Adelaide-born Hicks would be among the first group of Guantanamo Bay detainees to be charged some time after January 15. .....


.......Terry Hicks said he feared US authorities were rushing the charges in the newly-created military commissions, which replace the tribunals, to keep the case out of the real court system.

"I still have a feeling that they (the American government) do not want him to appear at a proper court because the evidence against him is not strong," Mr Hicks said.

"It all seems that they want him to front up at the commissions as quickly as possible.

"We have to wait and see - we are in a waiting game."

Hicks' lawyers have lodged action in the Federal Court in Sydney accusing the Australian government of failing its duty of care to protect him and asking for him to be set free.

The hearing has been adjourned until February 26.

Mr Hicks said the mental state of his 31-year-old son had grossly declined in the past five years while held at Guantanamo Bay with allegations of torture and abuse.

The allegations have been rejected by the US and Australian governments.

"I think he will be struggling, physically and mentally, to appear in front of a court or a commission," he said. ... <cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/hicks-father-sceptical-of-possible-new-charges/2007/01/04/1167777211344.html

This is a report I missed earlier, dated 18th December. It'd be very interesting to know more details of the grounds for releasing some detainees & keeping the others at Guantanamo Bay after so long. Can we assume that the 395 still there are considered "the worst of the worst"?:

US sends 18 prisoners home from Guantanamo
December 18, 2006 - 11:15AM/The AGE

The US military sent 18 Guantanamo prisoners to their home nations during the weekend, reducing the captive population at its Navy base in Cuba to approximately 395, the Department of Defence said today. (Dec 18th 2006).

Seven captives were transferred to Afghanistan, six to Yemen, three to Kazakhstan and one each to Libya and Bangladesh, the Pentagon said in a news release.

"These detainees were recommended for transfer or release by multiple review board processes conducted at Guantanamo Bay," the statement said.

The Pentagon said the prison's population now stands at approximately 395 inmates. It has never given a precise figure, citing security concerns. ... cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-sends-18-prisoners-home-from-guantanamo/2006/12/18/1166290451669.html

Another prominent Australian voice joins the chorus. Very diplomatically. I disagree with him that the Australian Attorney General "got it right" over his latest comments earlier this week expressing frustration with the slowness of the process in charging David Hicks. I would have agreed had Phillip Ruddock made these comments much, much earlier ... not after 5 years of inaction by the Australian government!:

Federal police chief adds his voice to chorus demanding fair go for Hicks
Cynthia Banham
January 5, 2007/SMH

THE Australian Federal Police Commissioner, Mick Keelty, has become the latest prominent figure to voice concern over the treatment of David Hicks.

Mr Keelty said yesterday his personal view was that "justice should be swift for anybody so their guilt or innocence can be determined as quickly as possible".

Referring to the five years Mr Hicks has spent in captivity at the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay without trial, Mr Keelty said the Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, had "got it right" and that "all of us would have liked something to have occurred well before now". ... <cont>

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/federal-police-chief-adds-his-voice-to-chorus-demanding-fair-go-forhicks/2007/01/04/1167777218849.html

.... Letters to the editor from this morning's AGE newspaper:

Hicks, too, deserves 'due process', PM

IT BEGGARS belief that Prime Minister John Howard can congratulate the Iraqi authorities on their fair legal treatment of Saddam Hussein while the Australian Government continues to deny David Hicks natural justice. How is it that the PM celebrates "due process" in relation to a murderous tyrant while stubbornly continuing to deny the same due process to Hicks?Geoff Provis, president, Law Institute of Victoria

Mental cruelty

THE study of detainees reported in The Age (3/1) is further evidence of the fact that imprisonment that is indefinite causes mental illness.

Imposing indefinite detention upon a person knowing (or not caring) that it will break down their mental health and will disable them, possibly permanently, must surely amount to cruel and inhumane treatment.
Reports of the deteriorating mental health of David Hicks, given the indefinite nature of his imprisonment, do not therefore surprise but should disturb. He is suffering a double injustice. Not only are his rights, including that of a fair trial, being violated but also his mistreatment is disabling him in a way that cannot be condoned. Nothing can justify knowingly causing mental illness. David Hicks should be returned to Australia now.

Julian Gardner, Public Advocate

http://www.theage.com.au/letters/index.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2

Damn straight. We got our monobrowed leader extolling political coups in the ME, while ignoring another war "criminal" in gitmo.

Hicks may not be innocent, but five years of putting up with narcissistic yanks would be enough to drive anyone to drink. Let the ****** stand trial.

Hell, the Pom gov took all their boys home already.

But we've got Alex Downer.. He gives "nancy boy" a new heritage.

There used to be a saying in this country "innocent until proven guilty". Based on that, Hicks is an innocent man who has been locked away for years and who has no means of ever standing trial. It's the most heinous kind of human rights abuse there is.

I've debated the Hicks issue ad nauseum on other boards, and pundits that support his incarceration claim that if he was released, he would head straight back to Afghanistan to continue his personal jihad against the west.

I think that is bollocks myself, but what do you think?

One assumes he would be deported to Australia, and never given a passport and watched pretty carefully here.


So no, I do not agree.

Or rather, I agree that it is bollocks.

Having said that, and I do agree, what danger is there in releasing the guy? Like after five years, I'm sure thay any information that his torturers could have extracted would already be out of him?

Not to be forgetting that he shot nobody, and was captured before any conflict happened.

British "combatants" held at gitmo went home years ago, courtesy of the efforts of their government ministers' efforts.

We already know that builder Its the deputy sherriff you need to convince.

Or vote him out of office. It would appear that this is the only alternative measure available.

More effort was placed on the Bali nine than Hicks, and that is abysmal in and of itself. Sad reflection on the rubber-stamping of shrubbite "law".

It's extremely unlikely that he'd want to, anyway, given that he's renounced Islam & is no longer a Muslim.

Apart from that, I doubt he's going to be mentally & physically capable of anything much at all, say nothing if rushing back to Afghanistan, after what he's been through at Guantanamo Bay. He sounds very unwell.

And as has been mentioned, he won't have a passport, so won't be able to leave Australia.

And just say he wanted to "cause trouble" when back in Oz. (Extremely unlikely, but just say ...) These are the conditions of Jack Thomas' ("Jihad Jack") control order after the charges against him were overturned last year. I assume David Hicks would have similar.:

- He must abide by a curfew, confining him to his home from midnight until 5am each morning.

- He is restricted in the phone services he is allowed to operate (one mobile phone, one land line) and must have these approved by the Australian Federal Police. He is prohibited from using public pay phones
He is required to seek written approval to make telephone calls

- He is not to communicate with a list of persons identified as terrorists including Osama bin Laden[11], Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

- He must agree to be fingerprinted.

- He must not leave Australia.

Not much opportunity to cause Mr Ruddock any worries there!

Mamdouh Habib, since his release from Guantanamo Bay, has had pretty stringent restrictions placed on him, too, say nothing of bad treatment (harassment?) from local police!

So I think it's pretty safe to assume that David Hicks will not be in any position to be involved in any further troublesome activities, in Australia or anywhere else. When & if he ever gets out of that place.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Thomas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamdouh_Habib

Ruddock can polish my shoes, for all I care. It's Howard and Downer that need to be reamed up the kyhber pass over Hicks' lack of attention.

Both pathetic losers that wish Hicks would just go away.