Government must review counter-terror laws
31 July 2007, 10:13AM
© Sydney Morning Herald
The case of Dr Mohammed Haneef has highlighted more than ever the need for a review of Australia's counter-terror legislation.
Parts of the legislation were used for the first time in Dr Haneef's case, and Amnesty International believes his experience was nothing short of an assault on his human rights and freedoms.
Dr Haneef was held for nearly one month in detention - two weeks of which were without charge or the ability to apply for bail. The eventual charge of recklessly providing support to a terrorist organisation was dropped on Friday 27 July.
Dr Haneef also had his work visa revoked by the Migration Minister. The Government has said it will not reinstate this visa.
Dr Haneef's experience and treatment seriously compromised his right to a presumption of innocence.
Amnesty International has continually campaigned for reform of the legislation since its incremental introduction began in 2002. We are calling for a thorough review of the human rights impact of all counter terror legislation.
The case also highlights the need for providing effective recourse for people like Dr Haneef - such as a Human Rights Act.
By Category
By month
Make an impact
You can make a difference right now. Your action will help shine the light of hope into people's lives across the world.
Check out what 4910 people are doing right now to support human rights.
Stay Informed
Get Involved
Amnesty International relies on your support to continue our vital work protecting human rights. Please help us keep governments accountable, bring the guilty to justice, and save lives.
Sitewide information
- Copyright © Amnesty International Australia
- ABN: 640 0280 6233
- Phone: 1300 300 920
Comments
Comments are submitted by members of the public and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or positions of Amnesty International Australia. If you find a comment objectionable please contact the web editor.
Tom Bombadill
7 August 2007, 08:07PM
Haneef may be innocent but he is certainly suspicious. The risks of letting someone with connections with terrorists, who could possibly be a terrorist are too great. The Australian Government has made the right decision under the law, and besides, an Australian visa is not a right, it is a privilege. There are plenty of doctors in India who would like to work in Australia that do not come from suspicious families, why choose a man from a family of terrorists?
Narendra Mohan
2 August 2007, 11:18AM
The laws have the potential of concentrating enormous and arbitrary powers in the hands of the ministers and police. They can potentially be used against any dissenters or critics of government, possibly Trade unions and anti-war campaigners.
Page 1 of 1 pages