This is a succinct and sensible analysis of the Haneef "Inquiry". The available consolation is that The Hon John Clarke QC will be fearless in requesting, because he will require, real and coercive powers.

iudex

There should be no enquiry into the Haneef episode. It is a waste of time and, more importantly, a waste of taxpayers’ money on a nobody foreigner who would not have been here at all if it were not for the lack of national spirit and pride in Australia which would see Australian doctors trained in Australia. The most militant union in Australia – the AMA – is also to blame, with its ‘quota system’.

John Clarke advised that he did not have the authority to preside over a non-existent judicial enquiry, but our clod-hopping Attorney General said that he will ‘fix’ that.

How much more time and money will that eat up before the charade gets under way again?

A Royal Commission into one Indian national would be ridiculous. There are not a “number of alternatives”, as the author suggests. The only way to put the Haneef episode – hardly of importance to anyone except Haneef, who never faced trial – behind us, is to drop the whole silly thing.

Any enquiry would just be a demonstration of the ALP vindictiveness which has been so apparent since they won the election. Not satisfied with winning, not a day passes when they don’t feel the need to rubbish the previous Government

I believe the Immigration Minister has promised, not to set up a royal commission if asked, but to increase Clarke's powers.

Mr. Right, you have not been listening. This is an enquiry into serious misuse of powers by the Australian Federal Police and possibly the Commnwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, including failure of the prosecution in a criminal case to disclose to the defence material which exonerates the defendant. It also involves a failure to inform the then Minister for Immigration, Mr. Andrews, of information which on the balance of probablilities, completely cleared Dr. Haneef of wrongdoing. It involves a conspiracy to subvert the rule of law. It involves failure of the police to allow for their cultural ignorance, and further incompetence revealed in the transcripts of the questioning of Dr. Haneef.

I hope you are treated like Stefan Kiszko, Adolf Beck and Oscar Slater. No, on second thoughts, I hope that this inquiry will lead to reforms to Australia's police services, so that you are not at risk of such treatment.

Mr Right yet again demonstrates his complete lack of understanding of issues of importance.

Why is it necessary to investigate this matter? To ensure innocent people, whether they be Australians or not, do not get arrested, charged, deported or even convicted under anti-terrorist legislation which fails to provide suspects with a proper means of defence.

Mr Right should also ask himself why John Howard lost his seat in Bennelong. An important part of it was the local Indian community withdrawing their support precisely because of the Haneef case. As they saw it, it could so easily have been them.

REgarding Haneef...

He has become little more than a pawn in the Left wing movements attempt to destabilize our society, by undermining our faith in political and security institutions.

Looking at 'how things work' and the interaction on the Punic wars and the actions and intrigue of various power players, creating "threats"...to justify certain actions....

it should come as no surprise that the Left is just as capable of manufacturing 'threats' "Oh oh..ohhhhh the GUVment is gonna GET us all"
as the 'Guvment' is in saying "Oh oh Ohhhhh there is a terrorist threat out there"

It NEVER just works one way. Its all about POWER and influence.. don't look for justice or fairness.. nor compassion in the actities of those lawyers supporting Haneef.. just look for ONE thing "self interest"

My recent exposure to senior intelligence personel convinces me that they can find every dotted 'i' and every crossed 't' in a persons life
if they want to. Then... if we think all that will be laid out for the drooling salivating pleasure of we news consumers, we are living in lala land.

Aaah.... the refreshing words of the Lord Jesus Christ. "I came NOT to be served but to serve and give my life as a ransom for many"....

No self interest there..but compassion and love for a lost humanity !

One more poke.

<<This is an enquiry into serious misuse of powers by the Australian Federal Police and possibly the Commnwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, including failure of the prosecution in a criminal case to disclose to the defence material which exonerates the defendant>>

2 points.

1/ 'Based on what you THINK you know!

2/ 'That statement above is simply code for "how can I wreck the institutions on which Australia is based, so I can then offer my socialist alternative to disheartened people."

Myyyy goodness u must think we are truly dull.

What I would like to know how long the English police stayed in Australia. I believe it was only a few days. Did they return to England after finding out that the phone card was not at the explosion site and that there was early evidence that the bomber acted alone.

A good clear article about the inadequacies of the investigation into the Haneef matter.

What a pity some posters don't have the same capacity to critically examine the issues.

Haneef's arrest was, in my humble opinion and the opinion of many many Australians, an abuse of power. Given the doubts about his arrest and the millions currently being wasted in the AFP's ongoing "investigation" (read attempt to protect arse) it is appropriate to look deeply into the matters and reasons for their occurrence.

To paint this as some sort of coded left wing scare campaign is bizarre. The right to liberty is fundamental and arbitrary arrest offends a basic right. Let's have a powerful enquiry to determine if in fact this was an arbitrary and unwarranted arrest.

It also may highlight the attack that the anti-terrorism laws really are on all our human rights.

And it matters not a whit that Dr Haneef was an Indian working legally in Australia. But Australians have been and will be victims of these and other laws, especially under a Government which specifically used fear of the other as an election tool.

In any event Immigration has imprisoned Australian citizens.
The enquiry if it does recommend and get real inquisitorial powers could help break the culture of xenophobia and racism that Howard exploited and Labor may try to pander to.

“Mr Right should also ask himself why John Howard lost his seat in Bennelong. An important part of it was the local Indian community withdrawing their support precisely because of the Haneef case. As they saw it, it could so easily have been them.”

Should I indeed, Cazza? John Howard lost his seat because he hung on to the leadership for too long, and he deserved the loss.

As for your claim that “…it was the local Indian community withdrawing their support …” you are talking absolute nonsense. If you must regurgitate other peoples’ opinions, try to go with generally accepted and probable ones. Even the successful ALP candidate ‘recognised’ the CHINESE COMMUNITY was the biggest factor in unseating Howard. That is probably rubbish too.

If it is not rubbish, it should indicate, even to an immature person like you, that Australia is on the downhill run when an ethnic group can hold sway in an election. Then again, perhaps you would prefer the drama and excitement of Fiji, where Fijians had to resort to insurrection to wrest control from the Chinese and Indian communities.

Personally, I remain unconvinced that, as yet in Australia, citizens do vote according to ethnicity. It would be plainly racist of me to think otherwise without proof. You should think about your own possible racism.

Flo,

There are not many comments sillier and more irrelevant than yours that have appeared on OLO.

“Mr. Right, you have not been listening”, says ‘ozbiz’. If you mean that I have not been listening to the stupid left wing propaganda that seems to so capture you, you are dead right. I have no idea who Stefan Kiszko, Adolf Beck and Oscar Slater are, nor do I care. You seem to be another one who is taking his/her cues from other people, rather than trying to think for yourself about what is best for your country.

Passy says:” What a pity some posters don't have the same capacity to critically examine the issues.” What he/she means is that it’s a pity other people don’t agree with Passy

The responsibility for this debacle does lies with the previous government and the extent that police or DPP are culpable is yet to be determined - that is the role of an inquiry.

From what I have read (and it is by no means extensive), the police were initially acting on evidence provided by UK police and it all went 'belly up'once it was found that Haneef’s Sim card was not found at the bomb site as earlier reported, but in his cousin’s flat. It is not clear if the cousin had prior knowledge of the bombing which, if true, makes the Sim card evidence irrelevant.

There may be a lot more we don't know as others have implied - there also may be nothing - but the point is that this is usual in any investigation and moreso when it involves terrorism. Unless there are protections in place to defend human rights what is it that we are seeking to protect via terrorism legislation?

Even if "judicial" status is granted, I can see this going the way of the children overboard affair and the Cole inquiry (which was a Royal Commission) into the food for oil program/AWB – truth becomes expendable when there are too many politicians' reputations at stake and public servants with the next Dep Sec role in their sights. I hope I am wrong and this inquiry won't be another whitewash but I'm not holding my breath.

I envisage any papers divulged will be those that are sufficiently sanitised, the others into the "never to be revealed" pile or worse (as in the case of AWB) into the shredder. Same story, different characters.

Boaz, no-one is arguing that wrongdoings and cover up are the domain of any one side of politics. I don’t know how you manage to do it but you always manage to turn these subjects into a socialist conspiracy theory mate - as my teenager would say, you really gotta chill.

I have no particular opinion as to the rights and wrongs of the Haneef case. What I would like to know -- and what all taxpayers deserve to know -- is how much of my money was spent on several hundred members of the AFP spending weeks gathering 'evidence' for a case which did not proceed, and what steps have been taken to ensure that this phenomenal waste of time and money does not happen again? If these officers are necessary to protect our country, then how is it that so much of their time could be devoted to such a futile activity: and if they are not necessary, then why are they on the payroll at all?

Since 2001 the security industry has been enjoying a Golden Age of high finance, fuelled by fear and loathing. It's high time for common sense to make a comeback, and I support any inquiry which will restore balance and reason in our national agenda.

So far it has cost $8 million with about 600 cops crawling all over the man's life to find precisely nothing.

He was fitted up and the email to Sabeel from his brother, the interviews and so on all show that Keelty did a gotcha.

Everyone reading the transcripts of the case knows that Keelty should be sacked and Ramzi Jabbour should be charged with perjury for giving knowingly false information to the Brisbane courts.

Anyone who argues that there should not be an investigation into the torture of Haneef need to remember that he was detained by immigration out of sheer spite and once in their clutches he had to win the appeal or stay locked up for years on end.

The Aussie populace is asking for police on their street and not in police cars, yet the federal police appear to have enormous funds and personel; to checkout somebody who does not even live here now!

On Youtube you can still see episodes of the Keystone Cops!

Mr Right. to vote you have to be an Australian citizen, I being an "ethnic"" originated from the UK in 1956, is that acceptable to you, or should I go back to Stepney London E1?

boaz, a word of advice: if you actually include some facts or evidence or argument, you're paranoid rants won't come across as 100% loony. with work, you should be able to get it down to 80% or so.

It's a real shame some of the one-eyed supporters cannot see past party politics and look at the real issue - abuse of process.

Reducing the issue to a simplistic left v right debate is silly.

For the record, I am not a lawyer. My contributions to public debate are at my own cost. The facts on which I rely in my contribution above are on the public record. They were also widely reported in newpapers and the electronic media.

I know a number of civil libertarians. Most of them are traditional conservatives or moderate liberals--no members of the Left amongst those.

Boaz David: your initials are BD, but you seem to know very little about Christian theology.

Hi Ozbib.... err "you know very little about Christian theology" ?

hmmm how so old son?

Please be more specific.

cheers