
Copyright © 2007, The Bilegrip Mob
Melbourne barrister Robert Richter, QC, has written a blistering condemnation of Attorney-General Philip Ruddock for his failure to uphold Australian and international law regarding David Hicks: Hypocrites breaking our law at ever turn.
Philip Ruddock is a hypocrite when parading his Amnesty International membership. He pretends to give a toss for the organisation and the principles for which it stands: the rule of law, freedom from arbitrary arrest and punishment, freedom from torture, opposition to the perversion of accepted civilised notions of justice and the obligations he owes to those notionally under his protection. Instead, he has publicly and shamefully betrayed all of these precepts.
He is a liar when he pretends concern for David Hicks' fate. His protestations about Australia's efforts to secure a speedy trial for Hicks cross the line of decency when we consider that Hicks is, after five years, not charged with any offence. Nor is he subject to the jurisdiction of any lawfully constituted court of justice. We know he has not committed any offences against Australian law. Our A-G says so. We also know that he does not stand charged with any known crime against US law. So how is it that the Attorney-General has not demanded the return of Hicks to the country that owes him protection as a matter of law?
It is because the A-G has publicly prostituted his duties to the law — and to those he owes a duty of protection — in the service of his political masters in the government he serves.
I say this without cover of privilege and challenge him to sue for defamation and take the risk of the facts emerging in any litigation. Cabinet solidarity is one thing; his mealy-mouthed public utterances on the subject are another. He should at least have the decency to stay silent rather than seek to defend and advance the indefensible.
Richter also goes after his "political masters", John Howard and Australia's Very Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer:
Messrs Ruddock, Howard and Downer's pronouncements about seeking to have Hicks charged early in the new year (in front of commissions that have not yet been lawfully set up!) seem to me to be a desperate cover-up of their government's, fundamental dereliction of duty. Instead of demanding Hicks' return, they have made themselves complicit in procuring an illegal process to occur as soon as possible.
Rather than facing up to their duties to protect the fundamental rights of those subject to their theoretical protection, Ruddock , Howard and Downer are deliberately compounding the illegal actions of the American Administration by counselling and procuring an illegal process. This is a crime under our law. Instead of confessing to a wrong and doing the decent thing by trying to set it right, they are pushing ahead with "churching the whore" after the abortion. They urge the Americans to create a facade of legality for what is seen by all honest jurists as a gross violation of national and international law.
How has it come to pass that Australians are ruled by these men, each of them guilty of crimes against humanity. Ruddock and Downer can claim the Nuremberg Defence: "I was only following orders". But John Howard? He'd love to claim it too: "I was only following President Bush's orders". Given that he has turned Australia over to the Americans as nothing more than a satellite state or colonial possession -- a sort of Puerto Rico of the Antipodes -- particularly with the new spy base to be built at Geraldton, it's a defence that might just work. Particularly since our homegrown axis of evil -- Howard, Downer and Ruddock -- have seen fit to assault our justice system with laws that could easily turn this country into a police state if enacted. Somewhere in the fine print there may be provisions to treat them as "citizens above suspicion". That is, protected from prosecution.
If only Ruddock would take Richter's challenge and sue for defamation. Richter and his colleagues will then have the opportunity to lay bare this traitor's dereliction of duty and above all his crimes against Australia.
-- Olney Garkle
Olney, it's great to see Richter come out swinging. It may give inspiration to a few others who have kept their heads down. An election year may well help jolt a few less esteemed lawyers to remember what they studied at uni before the interregnum. Simple stuff like the 'presumption of innocence' and where they left good ol' 'habeus corpus'.
I'm not holding my breath, but things are looking a little bit more encouraging.
Nelson, Costello and Hockey have further shown themselves, in recent days, to be the creeps in waiting. Hope it stays that way.
Posted by joe2 on February 18, 2007
Richter's words were briefly discussed on Fran Kelly's Radio National Breakfast program this morning. Michelle Grattan thought Ruddock would let it slide. Checking Google, I can find little mention of it. Andrew Bolt is listed as having a go at Richter but the link does not lead to any such diatribe. I'm sure it's there somewhere.
Interregnum -- I like that. The present one -- 1996-2007 -- is a bloody long time to go without a legitimate leader.
Posted by Olney Garkle on February 19, 2007
What Olney Garkle writes is correct. I would also add that Howard is a traitor to the Australian people, as are many of his underlings. They followed the world's No 1 terrorist, one G.W. Busch .... oops, Bush; in and act of terrorist action against the sovereign state of Iraq. Thus they made terrorists of our military personnel before, during and after the fact. (It matters not if you like the people in that other country or that you have designs to grab their oil or other resources, this is no justification for blatant terrorist aggression.)
Not only are they attacking other countries on behalf of their foreign boss, they are attacking Australian workers as the conspiracy against the MUA and the attack on workers generally via their "WorkChoices" anti-worker IR laws ... laws straight out of the workplace laws Hitler's fascist Germany of the 1930's. There is a comparison chart showing how Hitler's laws of 1937 are so closely followed by Howard's current IR laws.
See http://www.uglyspage.com/index1.html
Posted by ugly on May 20, 2007