Post by Earl Grey on Oct 17, 2012 9:59:42 GMT 11
The Howard Government was advised by the Australian Law Commission that the charge against Hicks was bogus.
The Defence Force chiefs even advised that the charge was bogus.
The Howard Government ignored that advice.
Hicks charge ruled invalid by US court
October 17, 2012 - 9:14AM
THE charge with which David Hicks was convicted at Guantanamo Bay in 2007 has been ruled invalid by a US appeals court because it could not be applied retrospectively, meaning Hicks can claim to be an innocent man.
Overnight in Washington DC, the United States Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Osama bin Laden's former driver, Salim Hamdan, who, along with Mr Hicks was the first detainee to be put before the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay.
Like Mr Hicks, he was found guilty of the charge of providing material support for terrorism.
The court found Mr Hamdan's conviction could not stand because, under the international law of war in effect at the time of his actions, there was no such defined war crime.
The charge was created in 2006.
In 2007, the Howard government was keen to end the political embarrassment caused by Mr Hicks's ongoing incarceration and Mr Hicks was keen to get home. He had been at Guantanamo Bay since being captured in Afghanistan in December, 2001.
In a plea bargain which, it is believed was negotiated with the knowledge of officials of both governments, he pleaded guilty to the charge and, on March 31, 2007, was given a seven-year jail sentence, which was suspended for all but nine months.
In May, he was flown back to Australia, sent to jail in Adelaide and released four days after Christmas.
Mr Hicks has been trying to clear his name since. The US Court decision, which could still be appealed before the Supreme Court, applies equally to Mr Hicks, said his former lawyer and ex-Marine, Dan Mori. Mr Mori, now living in Melbourne and practising law, told the National Times this morning that he had warned at the time the charge could not be applied retrospectively.
“I could not have screamed any louder about this issue, but it seemed to have been ignored by the Australian government at that time," he said.
"The issue of the retrospective nature of the offence was raised early in the military commission proceedings.
"One of the first motions filed in the military commission by me was attacking the invalidly of the 'material support' charge.
"The fact that the charges had been made up retrospectively and were not valid offences under the Laws of War was obvious.”
Read more: www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/hicks-charge-ruled-invalid-by-us-court-20121017-27q00.html#ixzz29VOE65wk
The Defence Force chiefs even advised that the charge was bogus.
The Howard Government ignored that advice.
Hicks charge ruled invalid by US court
October 17, 2012 - 9:14AM
THE charge with which David Hicks was convicted at Guantanamo Bay in 2007 has been ruled invalid by a US appeals court because it could not be applied retrospectively, meaning Hicks can claim to be an innocent man.
Overnight in Washington DC, the United States Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Osama bin Laden's former driver, Salim Hamdan, who, along with Mr Hicks was the first detainee to be put before the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay.
Like Mr Hicks, he was found guilty of the charge of providing material support for terrorism.
The court found Mr Hamdan's conviction could not stand because, under the international law of war in effect at the time of his actions, there was no such defined war crime.
The charge was created in 2006.
In 2007, the Howard government was keen to end the political embarrassment caused by Mr Hicks's ongoing incarceration and Mr Hicks was keen to get home. He had been at Guantanamo Bay since being captured in Afghanistan in December, 2001.
In a plea bargain which, it is believed was negotiated with the knowledge of officials of both governments, he pleaded guilty to the charge and, on March 31, 2007, was given a seven-year jail sentence, which was suspended for all but nine months.
In May, he was flown back to Australia, sent to jail in Adelaide and released four days after Christmas.
Mr Hicks has been trying to clear his name since. The US Court decision, which could still be appealed before the Supreme Court, applies equally to Mr Hicks, said his former lawyer and ex-Marine, Dan Mori. Mr Mori, now living in Melbourne and practising law, told the National Times this morning that he had warned at the time the charge could not be applied retrospectively.
“I could not have screamed any louder about this issue, but it seemed to have been ignored by the Australian government at that time," he said.
"The issue of the retrospective nature of the offence was raised early in the military commission proceedings.
"One of the first motions filed in the military commission by me was attacking the invalidly of the 'material support' charge.
"The fact that the charges had been made up retrospectively and were not valid offences under the Laws of War was obvious.”
Read more: www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/hicks-charge-ruled-invalid-by-us-court-20121017-27q00.html#ixzz29VOE65wk