John Murphy (Lowe, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This morning I wish to again raise a matter that should be of grave concern to any government which purports to espouse the values of freedom, liberty and justice. I speak about the continued incarceration of Mr David Hicks, who has been held in US custody for over five years.

In his Australia Day address on 26 January this year the Prime Minister rightly paid tribute to ‘the rule of law upheld by an independent and admirably incorruptible judiciary’. While many utilise those three words ‘rule of law’ as powerful rhetorical weapons, we ought to be concerned that their actions or inactions make a mockery of what those words actually stand for. We must never forget that one eminent principle emanating from the rule of law is that no free man or woman should be deprived of his or her life, liberty or property save by the due process of the law.

What, then, ought those with an undiminished belief in the rule of law make of David Hicks’s continued detention at Guantanamo? Perhaps we could gain some insight from the esteemed former Chief Justice of Australia, Sir Gerard Brennan, who has said that Australians should examine:

... how we have tolerated for five years now the barbarous treatment of the Australian David Hicks in Guantanamo Bay, still waiting to be charged, it seems, with an offence under a law yet to be specified, and tried by a process which mocks the civil rights sense of justice.

While the Howard government likes to talk about the rule of law, it has turned a blind eye to the US government’s erosion of judicial principles in the David Hicks case. While the Howard government likes to talk about upholding the rule of law, it has done little to seek natural justice for David Hicks.

One’s belief in the rule of law should be all pervasive. The rule of law ought to transcend the standards and behaviour found within any context, including the ‘war on terror’. We all loathe the thought of any Australian engaging in terrorist activities. We all detest terrorism. But the rule of law entails basic legal principles which any member of the Free World ought to adhere to. How can those who truly believe in a government of laws and not of men stand inert while David Hicks remains in detention without charge for years—not days or months? How can they stand by while attempts are made to establish a military commission which could be conceived as being imbued with self-interest or a partisan duty to convict? What guarantees have the Hicks family been provided to allay their legitimate doubts that a military commission will exist and operate independently from, and in paramountcy to, the US government? How can those who truly believe in the rule of law allow David Hicks to potentially be convicted on evidence obtained by coercion, on evidence which he may not have seen or on hearsay, with no inalienable right to cross-examine? These rules and procedures do not emanate from an ‘independent and admirably incorruptible judiciary’ that the Prime Minister has previously spoken about so fondly.

These are not trifling matters, but they have been treated as such by members of the Howard government. Echoing the Fremantle declaration, I call on the Howard government to do far more than has been done previously to uphold these basic legal principles and to do so immediately. The continued imprisonment of David Hicks in these conditions is inhumane and an anathema to the very values that Australia stands for and seeks to promote worldwide.

In the light of the disgraceful responses I have received to my questions about David Hicks’s case on the Notice Paper, including questions Nos 2788, 2789 and 4109, I am now calling on the Attorney-General to respond immediately to my question No. 4924, which I placed on the Notice Paper on Tuesday of this week. Members would recall that in August this year the Attorney-General indicated that he wanted a new US military tribunal and fresh charges to be in place by November. The Attorney-General also indicated that if this did not happen ‘as quickly as possible’ he would be seeking Mr Hicks’s return in the same way he did with Mamdouh Habib. Given that this time frame has now elapsed, and bearing in mind that it is 30 November today, the Attorney-General must answer my questions as a matter of urgency, for not only me and the Hicks family but also all the people who are supporting this matter. It is no longer good enough to feign concern about the treatment of Mr Hicks and do nothing. That is hypocrisy of the worst kind.