You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Down Under
Court overturns doctor's terror visa ban
2007-08-21
An Australian court has overturned a government decision to revoke the visa of an Indian doctor who was accused, but later cleared, of involvement in the failed car bomb attacks on London and Glasgow. The courtÂ’s decision was a bitter blow for the federal government, which has been criticised by civil rights groups and lawyers for its bungled arrest and subsequent release of Dr Mohamed Haneef in July.
Also a blow to common sense.
Dr Haneef, 27, was arrested in Brisbane, Queensland, in July and held for 11 days before being charged with “recklessly supporting terrorism” by giving the SIM card of his mobile phone to a second cousin, Sabeel Ahmed, after leaving the UK last year.

British police have charged Sabeel, 26, with withholding information that could have prevented an act of terrorism. His brother, Kafeel, died earlier this month of burns sustained when he allegedly crashed a Jeep packed with explosives into the front of Glasgow Airport on June 30.

Charges against Dr Haneef were dropped for lack of evidence and he consistently maintained that he gave away his SIM card so that his cousin could take advantage of extra minutes remaining on a pre-paid plan.
Needed those extra minutes to finalize the terror plan.
During his detention, immigration minister Kevin Andrews revoked Dr Haneef’s working visa on character grounds, saying he had a reasonable suspicion the doctor had an “association” with Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed.

But Justice Jeffery Spender ruled that Andrews made a technical error in cancelling the visa by applying a character test incorrectly. Justice Spender granted the government 21 days to respond to his ruling. Mr Andrews said the government would appeal. “When I made the decision to cancel Dr Haneef’s visa, I made it in the national interest and I stand by that decision,” the minister said.

The government was accused of making him a scapegoat.
What side are these courts on again?
That's a rhetorical question, right?
Posted by:Free Radical

#1  Hey...not the court's problem if the government can't follow its own laws.
Posted by: gromky   2007-08-21 08:11  

00:00