Nine men accused of preparing a terrorist act on Australian soil have ignited another debate, refusing to stand before the NSW Supreme Court and enter their not guilty pleas. The men, who were allegedly inspired by the September 11 attacks to plan terrorist attacks here, were brought amid tight security to the Supreme Court yesterday. They were formally arraigned, charged with conspiring to prepare a terrorist act, or acts, between July 8, 2004 and November 8, 2005.
Before Justice Anthony Whealy read out the indictment to the men - many dressed in traditional Islamic robes - he asked them to stand and enter their pleas. A lawyer for some of the men, Adam Houda, said there was a problem. "The accused have a problem with standing up Â… not to be disrespectful but it's a religious observance," Mr Houda said. Justice Whealy said he would not insist. "Judges are made of more robust material Â… but a jury might take a different view."
However, the men's stance concerned some Muslims. "[Standing up] is not out of respect for the judge, but for the institution of the court regardless of whether its Sharia or any other court," said a lawyer, Irfan Yusuf. "I can't see why these boys would have any problems. I am not aware of any mainstream religious scholars or jurists saying the accused should not stand."
| It would seem their problems are of their own making, wouldn't it? |
However, a friend of Mr Houda, the prominent Muslim spokesman Keysar Trad, told the Herald the observance came from an instruction by the prophet Muhammad to "not stand" and pay homage to him. "There's a lot of people in the Muslim community who take that proposition literally and feel if you were to stand up for another person that disturbs the balance of equality," Mr Trad said. "[Mr Houda] has assured me they were not being disrespectful."
The men - Mazen Touma, Mohamed Ali Elomar, Abdul Rakib Hasan, Khaled Cheikho, Moustafa Cheikho, Khaled Sharrouf, Mirsad Mulahalilovic, Omar Baladjam and Mohamed Jamal - all entered not guilty pleas. The youngest is Jamal, 22, the oldest Elomar, 42.
The logistical problems of the trial emerged yesterday, with the realisation that jury members may need to devote much of 2008 to hear the cases against the men. Justice Whealy, who presided over the trial of Faheem Khalid Lodhi last year, set the trial down for February, saying he did not want it to spill over into 2009. |