mohammed haneef

Crikey has brought to my attention a media statement by the Australian Federal Police regarding the Mohammed Haneef case. In part it reads:

AFP Professional Standards has investigated suspected leaks to the media and is satisfied that there has been no unlawful disclosure of information by AFP members. The matters identified as possible inappropriate conduct by officials of other agencies will be referred to the appropriate authorities.

The AFP has acted appropriately throughout the investigation.

Well that’s good then. Some “other agencies” are to blame.

However the statement also says:

The continuing attempts by Dr Haneef’s defence team to use the media to run their case is both unprofessional and inappropriate and the AFP has raised this aspect with the Queensland Legal Services Commission.

Uhuh. And how about an equivalent sentence complaining about the government’s attempts to use the media to run their case? Yes, Ruddock and Andrews, I’m looking at you. Is your behaviour not also “both unprofessional and inappropriate”? No, no equivalent set of words? Oh.

I was under the impression that in Western democracies the police (as well as the “other agencies”) were there to independently uphold the rule of law, not act as the minions of the government of the day. Silly me.

I’m always intrigued when a mention somewhere else in the mediablogopolitisphere generates traffic back to little old me. Yesterday’s article in Crikey is no exception…

• A friend wondered whether my current poll on the Haneef thingo is being run by Diebold. No, Bernard, it’s just that you’re allowed to choose more than one answer — that’s why things add to more than 100%.
• I was amused to see my piece right next to an article on The Trouble with Triple J by broadcaster Michael Tunn, since I was the ABC staffer who gave him a briefing when he joined the ABC at age 17.
• A PR firm invited me to attend a function tonight to see “a new social networking site for ‘grown ups’,” joining “six other bloggers who have an interest in social networking sites.”

More blog-fodder there, eh?

Despite calls for various people to resign over the Mohammed Haneef debacle, the government’s going to bluff their way out of it.

Kevin Andrews, in my estimate (and yours) the head which should roll first, is staying schtumm.

Mr Andrews said he would be happy to release the information but was not about to act improperly. Asked if he ever expected to be able to release the information Mr Andrews said: “I don’t know. I take advice… I will continue to do that because I think it’s important that I act on advice when I make decisions.”

Good thinking, Kevin. Listen to your advice, yes.

So, with Haneef out of the country and everyone saying nothing, we’ll soon forget. My guess is that sooner or later — but certainly before the election — we’ll find some other nearly-terrorist to arrest. This time the charges will stick. And buried down in the bottom of the story will be the news that Haneef’s been given his visa back.

Mind you, I could still be wrong. The day is but young…

Kevin Andrews, good grief!

Mr Andrews — who cancelled Dr Haneef’s visa soon after he was bailed — said the doctor’s swift departure after his release from detention only made him look more suspicious. “If anything, that actually heightens rather than lessens my suspicion,” he told commercial television.

Kevin Andrews, has your brain been turned on at any point during this debacle?

Dr Haneef was held in custody for what? 3 weeks call it. He’s heard how the evidence against him is a scrambled mess. He’s seen how his detention has become less and less about catching real terrorists and more and more about politicians and politicised public officials scrambling to protect their jobs. He’s had to experience the feral media pack. His reputation is now shit.

He has just been through what was probably the most frightening time of his life, and he wants to see his wife and newborn daughter.

If you were in Dr Haneef’s shoes, wouldn’t you be on the very first flight out of the country that put you through this nightmare?

No? You think this is suspicious? Exactly which parallel universe do you live in, Kevin?

OK, you have “secret information” that will justify your actions — but you have “one arm tied behind your back.” Exactly who tied it there, Kevin? Because everyone else involved in this case is leaking like a sieve. You’re not leaking — but you are sinking.

By any measure, the arrest and detention of Dr Mohammed Haneef on terrorism charges turned into a debacle. Much has already been written about it — and there’ll be a lot more to come, rest assured. The question that interests me right now, though, is who’ll wear the blame?

The new poll on my website asks a simple question: Who should be sacked?

• Federal police commissioner Mick Keelty? News today is that he’s blaming everyone else — but his organisation was in charge of the investigation, wasn’t it?
• Damian Bugg QC, Director of Public Prosecutions. While he did step in eventually, you’d have thought that in such a politically-sensitive case he’d have been involved from the start.
• Kevin Andrews, Minister for Immigration. Dear dear dear, Kevin, first WorkChoices and now this. Last week’s poll suggested you’d be first voted off the island, and it’s looking even more likely now.
• Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock, for sticking his oar into the mess.
• and I’ve made some other suggestions too.

If you vote, also feel free to post some comments here explaining your choice.

Yesterday the Snarky Platypus and I passed the usual gaggle of socialists set up outside the Dendy Cinema on King Street, Newtown. “Sign the petition. Release Dr Haneef,” they cried.

Oh dear. Silly, silly people…

Now you must understand that I’m not playing that right-wing commentators’ game of always prefacing “left” or “socialist” with “loony” or “silly”. That’s just name-calling and a very old propaganda technique indeed. That’s why I think Christian Kerr should grow up and stop using it in Crikey — calling his publication’s commentors shrubhuggers and Stalinists really is childish. After all, would we take a left-wing commentator seriously if they always referred to people anywhere to the right of themselves as Nazis or Fascists?

No, I’m calling these people “silly” because collecting signatures on a petition to release Dr Haneef is politically stupid and a waste of time.

• What happens to petitions to Parliament? Nothing, really. A functionary announces that a petition on [insert title] has been received with [insert number] of signatures. And then it’s filed away. In nearly every case, that’s the end of the story.
• The next sitting of federal parliament doesn’t even start until 7 August. It’ll be at least 10 days until your petition is tabled. If you really cared about Dr Haneef being in a cell, how about trying something quicker?
• The government really doesn’t care what people in Newtown think, because it’s the left-wing heartland. “Good heavens,” John Howard quakes, “folks in Newtown don’t like what we’re doing! We’d better change tack immediately!” Erm, no. Now if you collected signatures in Penrith or Ryde or Parramatta or some other marginal Liberal electorate then maybe they’d care — but I’m guessing that doesn’t have the same appeal as spending a sunny afternoon with your mates on King Street, eh?

But my fourth point is the crunch…

• Dr Haneef had already been released the previous night, charges dropped! While the Newtown socialists were collecting signatures calling for his release, Dr Haneef was already at home watching TV with family and friends.

Gawd, people! If you’re going to play politics, at least try to stay in touch. Perhaps even use that Internet thing!