AFP Chief having a sook over the Dr Haneef Case.
January 29th 2008 23:33
AFP Chief having a sook over the Dr Haneef Case.
The head of the Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty has come out to blast the media for its reporting during the Dr Haneef case. He has called for a media blackout in all terrorist cases until all legal avenues have been exhausted. Such a blackout would have prevented the reporting of the Dr Haneef case in the media.
The Dr Haneef case for anyone who has been living on Mars for the last year was the first time that the new anti-terror laws were fully tested in the Australian legal system. Under the laws Dr Haneef was arrested and questioned without charges being laid. His case collapsed in the courts as the facts indicated that his relationship to terrorism was a coincidental family connection and a SIM card linked to one of the bombers. The courts found that Dr Haneef had no case to answer but that did not stop the then Minister for Immigration Kevin Andrew from withdrawing the Doctors’ visa on bad character grounds. The ‘bad character grounds’ were determined by ministerial discretion and was appealed in the courts. In the meantime Dr Haneef was deported from Australia back to India and would have a permanent record as a terrorist security risk in every nation on Earth. In the last few weeks the final appeal to restore Dr Haneef’s visa won in the courts and he now free to return to Australia and continue his career as a medical doctor. However Dr Haneef has said that he will wait for the results of government enquiry into the handling of his case.
The motivation for Mick Keelty to blast the media may be related to calls for him to be sacked for his bungling of the evidence; the willingness to pursue charges against an innocent man; his cosy relationship with the Howard Government; his unwillingness to disclose the true facts of the case. The media rightfully described the AFP as a bunch of Keystone Cops and it was an opinion reflected by the Premier of Queensland at that time. Dr Haneef was not involved in terrorism; the SIM card that he gave to his cousin was not used in terrorist activities; Dr Haneef tried to call Scotland Yard 4 times before his arrest. On the AFP and Federal government side there were leaks coming thick and fast to paint Dr Haneef as some kind super villain. Yet it was not until the transcript of Dr Haneef’s interview was released to the media by his lawyers that the true picture of what was going on became clear.
Dr Haneef was being used as the test case for the controversial new anti-terror laws and a successful conviction under the new legislation would vindicate them publically. Instead the Haneef case highlighted how such laws can be abused for political gain and how Minister Kevin Andrews tried to manipulate this case for political gain in an election year. In short Dr Haneef was being used as a sacrifice to justify laws that curtail civil liberties and to drum up support for a Howard government election win. The fact that Dr Haneef was innocent was not important.
Perhaps Commissioner Keelty feels hard done by in the media or perhaps he finds public scrutiny and accountability an annoyance. Yet he is not the one who was arrested, interrogated, accused of terrorism and deported unjustly. Perhaps if Dr Haneef was some fool who took his punishment lying down then Keelty would be satisfied. Instead the media for once did their job correctly and exposed how an innocent man was being crucified for the pathetic careers of a few politicians and their cronies. This is something that will never have come to light if Mick Keelty gets his way with media blackouts.
The head of the Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty has come out to blast the media for its reporting during the Dr Haneef case. He has called for a media blackout in all terrorist cases until all legal avenues have been exhausted. Such a blackout would have prevented the reporting of the Dr Haneef case in the media.
The Dr Haneef case for anyone who has been living on Mars for the last year was the first time that the new anti-terror laws were fully tested in the Australian legal system. Under the laws Dr Haneef was arrested and questioned without charges being laid. His case collapsed in the courts as the facts indicated that his relationship to terrorism was a coincidental family connection and a SIM card linked to one of the bombers. The courts found that Dr Haneef had no case to answer but that did not stop the then Minister for Immigration Kevin Andrew from withdrawing the Doctors’ visa on bad character grounds. The ‘bad character grounds’ were determined by ministerial discretion and was appealed in the courts. In the meantime Dr Haneef was deported from Australia back to India and would have a permanent record as a terrorist security risk in every nation on Earth. In the last few weeks the final appeal to restore Dr Haneef’s visa won in the courts and he now free to return to Australia and continue his career as a medical doctor. However Dr Haneef has said that he will wait for the results of government enquiry into the handling of his case.
The motivation for Mick Keelty to blast the media may be related to calls for him to be sacked for his bungling of the evidence; the willingness to pursue charges against an innocent man; his cosy relationship with the Howard Government; his unwillingness to disclose the true facts of the case. The media rightfully described the AFP as a bunch of Keystone Cops and it was an opinion reflected by the Premier of Queensland at that time. Dr Haneef was not involved in terrorism; the SIM card that he gave to his cousin was not used in terrorist activities; Dr Haneef tried to call Scotland Yard 4 times before his arrest. On the AFP and Federal government side there were leaks coming thick and fast to paint Dr Haneef as some kind super villain. Yet it was not until the transcript of Dr Haneef’s interview was released to the media by his lawyers that the true picture of what was going on became clear.
Dr Haneef was being used as the test case for the controversial new anti-terror laws and a successful conviction under the new legislation would vindicate them publically. Instead the Haneef case highlighted how such laws can be abused for political gain and how Minister Kevin Andrews tried to manipulate this case for political gain in an election year. In short Dr Haneef was being used as a sacrifice to justify laws that curtail civil liberties and to drum up support for a Howard government election win. The fact that Dr Haneef was innocent was not important.
Perhaps Commissioner Keelty feels hard done by in the media or perhaps he finds public scrutiny and accountability an annoyance. Yet he is not the one who was arrested, interrogated, accused of terrorism and deported unjustly. Perhaps if Dr Haneef was some fool who took his punishment lying down then Keelty would be satisfied. Instead the media for once did their job correctly and exposed how an innocent man was being crucified for the pathetic careers of a few politicians and their cronies. This is something that will never have come to light if Mick Keelty gets his way with media blackouts.
| 71 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Rebecca 1
Famous Zoo
Ranting Rebecca
Guilty Pleasures
A Little Giggle
The whole Haneef case has always been a interesting one. I am very close to someone who worked on this case for the AFP. There is so much more to the story then the media have reported. I can't go into details for obvious reasons, but there was plenty of evidence that they had against Haneef, but most not used for a particular reason, again which I cannot detail.
Just because they let him go doesn't mean that he didn't do anything wrong. The courts bowed to public pressure which was built up by a the media frenzy that surrounded the case. I am studying journalism at uni and am ashamed of how the media reported this case. Nearly everything was sensationalised and the AFP took a real beating while working hard to protect this country.
I also would not take anything that Haneef's lawyer said to heart. His job was to get Haneef out and he did it any way he could. He appealed to the bleeding hearts and they responded exactly how he wanted.
Just remember that there is always more to the story. Maybe look at the other side, the side of those who are doing their job and trying to make this country as safe as possible for as many people as possible. Decisions have to be made that not everyone will agree with, but when is that not the case?
Cheers,
Bec
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
The issue is not one of pro AFP or anti AFP but one of criminal behavior. Whether you are close to some in the AFP who worked on the case or not makes little difference to the facts of the case. It is the facts that are available that can be commented upon and some hearsay evidence. If it is something that you cannot detail then why mention what you cannot prove?
Having followed this case closely and listened to the answers from all sides I am still left with absolutely no evidence that Dr Haneef did anything wrong. Yes, I did read the full transcript of his interrogation.
Criticizing his lawyer for doing his job is only fair if the Minister did not also try to appeal to people fears and prejudices. To claim that only bleeding hearts were concerned about this story is disingenuous and insulting to any intellectual questioning of authority. It is also insulting to suggest that the courts bowed to public pressure. So are we to assume that the judges are weak minded dolts who have never seen a tough case before or have ever looked up a law?
You may offer support to AFP or anyone that you wish but I fail to see why that support is unconditional. If the AFP are wrong then why should I support their mistakes? Mistakes do not make me safer. If they apply laws that make all of us less safe then they should be questioned.
There may well be more to this story but a media blackout will not bring it out. A media blackout will do nothing but hide mistakes, corruption and obvious injustices.