Judge blasts ASIO as terror case dropped
12th November 2007, 16:57 WST
Another high-profile terrorism case has collapsed, with a judge accusing ASIO officers of kidnapping and unlawfully detaining a young Sydney medical student.
Prosecutors dropped terrorism charges against Izhar Ul-Haque after a NSW Supreme Court judge ruled the misconduct of ASIO and Australian Federal Police (AFP) officers meant interviews with him were inadmissible as evidence.
In a scathing explanation for his ruling, Justice Michael Adams labelled the behaviour of ASIO officers "grossly improper" and criminal.
He said officers had kidnapped, falsely imprisoned and violated the civil rights of Mr Ul-Haque, 24, who was charged with training with the Pakistan-based terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) in early 2003, before it became a banned organisation.
Justice Adams found the "oppressive conduct" by ASIO officers had a flow-on effect in influencing Mr Ul-Haque's alleged admissions to the AFP.
The collapse of the case is another embarrassment for anti-terrorism authorities, following the dropping of terror charges against Gold Coast doctor Mohamed Haneef.
While Mr Ul-Haque remained silent on Monday, his lawyer, Adam Houda, said the prosecution had been "moronic", and "no more than a show trial designed to justify the billions of dollars spent on counter-terrorism".
The Australian Council for Civil Liberties said the judge's findings indicated serious problems with the way ASIO operated.
But federal Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock said he had confidence in the security agencies.
"I don't think it's an embarrassment when the legal system works as intended," he added, noting the Director of Public Prosecutions had decided to discontinue the case.
"The proceedings may be continued again at a later point in time," he said.
As more than 20 officers searched his family's Sydney home on the evening of November 6, 2003, three ASIO officers confronted Mr Ul-Haque as he arrived at nearby Blacktown railway station.
They drove him to a neighbourhood park and subjected him to "intimidating" questioning, the judge said.
"Any ordinary member of the public, let alone a 21-year-old, would, I think, be disturbed and frightened by being informed by intelligence officers that, rather than going to some office for questioning, this was going to take place (close to dark) in a park where the conversation would be 'private'," he said.
Mr Ul-Haque was told he was "in serious trouble" and the judge noted an officer later reported that information was elicited after "robust discussion and considerable prompting".
Back at his home, he was again interviewed after midnight in a bedroom where he was kept "incommunicado" under the "colour" of the search warrant.
The judge said he was satisfied two officers committed the "criminal offences of false imprisonment and kidnapping at common law", while an unlawful trespass was committed against Mr Ul-Haque's parents.
"Their conduct was grossly improper and constituted an unjustified and unlawful interference with the personal liberty of the accused," he said.
He accepted Mr Ul-Haque had believed he was under arrest and if he did not do what the officers said, they would either use physical violence, deport him or do something to his family.
"It was a gross interference by the agents of the state with the accused's legal rights as a citizen, rights which he still has, whether he be suspected of criminal conduct or not and whether he is a Muslim or not," the judge said.
He found the impropriety of the officers was "intentional and calculated to produce the very admissions that were made".
"There is no suggestion that the officers acted contrary to ASIO protocols and good reason for thinking that they did not," he said, adding that therefore it was unlikely they would be disciplined.
The judge said he believed Mr Ul-Haque did not know he would be committing a crime under Australian law by attending the camp.
Outside court, Mr Houda said terror laws had been introduced supposedly to capture terrorists, not "brilliant young men" like Mr Ul-Haque.
"It has been one bungled prosecution after another," he said.
"We have all seen the disgraceful conduct afforded against Dr (Mohamed) Haneef and today you have heard the disgraceful conduct meted out against my client."
A charge of supporting a terrorist organisation laid against Dr Haneef was dropped by the Commonwealth DPP in July due to a lack of evidence following a series of investigative bungles.
While he is now facing retrial, an appeal court last year threw out the terrorism case against Joseph "Jihad Jack" Thomas in Victoria because evidence obtained against him by the AFP in Pakistan was inadmissible.
The Australian Council for Civil Liberties president, Terry O'Gorman, said: "The problem with ASIO powers, particularly with the huge number of increased terrorism laws that have been passed since 2001, is that they are becoming increasingly unaccountable."
AAP
So what I say, this judge would be the first one to whine if there was a terrorist attack.
Topic: Judge blasts ASIO as terror case dropped (Read 895 times)