Download PDFM E D I A R E L E A S E
Nicola Roxon MP Shadow Attorney-General
4 August 2005
Ruddock v Experts
The Attorney-General is increasingly isolated in his assertion that Australian citizen David Hicks will get a fair trial through the military commission.
A growing number of experts and insiders are supporting Labor’s call for the Government to reassess their position and demand a fair trial in the US.
Mr Ruddock is either too stubborn or too incompetent to see that his opinion that the military commission is fair is unsustainable.
The list of experts disagreeing with Mr Ruddock is growing:
⢠US military prosecutors say the process is ‘rigged’ and that Commission members had been ‘hand-picked’ so that ‘they will not acquit detainees.’
⢠Captain Paul Willee QC, the top barrister in the Australian Defence Force, says the Military Commission process means Mr Hicks will not get a fair trial.
⢠The UK Government, in direct contradiction of Mr Ruddock, says “We in the UK have been unable to accept that the US military tribunals proposed for those detained at Guantanamo Bay offer sufficient guarantees of a fair trial in accordance with international standards.”
⢠Lex Lasry QC , the barrister who observed the Military Commission’s firsthand (on behalf of the Law Council) said “a fair trial for David Hicks is virtually impossible”.
⢠Today, former High Court Justice Mary Gaudron has added her name to the growing list of those concerned about the process. She said the rules of the Military Commissions “are anything but consistent with the notion of a fair trial in respect of a criminal offence.”
As the expert opinion piles up against him, what is it going to take for Mr Ruddock to admit that he has got it wrong?
Labor has demanded a fair trial since the Military Commission process was announced.
The chilling reality is that Howard Government is just too out of touch or too incompetent to be relied on for this most basic protection.
Thursday, 4 August 2005
For more information call: Jacob Varghese on 0417 108 362