Haneef case: Former Melbourne judge says Australian Federal government Government has sought to render the legal process irrelevant

Jump to Comments

A former Melbourne judge, who declined to be named, said the Haneef case had exposed tensions between the executive arm of government and judges, reported The Sydney Morning Herald (21/7/2007, p. 6).

Tensions exacerbated: Those tensions had been “exacerbated by the manner in which government ministers have intervened in the Haneef case”. Government ministers, prosecuting authorities and police often resented court scrutiny of their decisions “and prefer their decisions to be rubber-stamped”, he said.

Decision shows scant respect for judicial process: “The remarks of minister Ruddock, which followed the decision of the magistrate to grant bail to Mr Haneef, showed scant respect for the judicial process,” he said. “If he did not like the decision he could have appealed. Instead, the Government sought to render the legal process irrelevant by cancelling the visas of the Haneefs.”

Handling of sensitive information: “Judges and magistrates well appreciate that in terrorism cases there may be information that is extremely sensitive, and the legislation provides for the handling of such information without compromising national security and public safety. It seems that the Government is not prepared to adopt that process, however, and to respect the integrity of judicial officers.”

Activist judges criticise laws: The former judge suggested the Government had fostered a debate about so-called activist judges who criticised the laws, saying it invites suspicion that the Government is seeking public support for bypassing the judicial process whenever it fails to get the decision it wants. “I think we are heading to a major confrontation … between ministers… who want to suspend the rule of law, and judges, who regard it as their duty to maintain the rule of law.”

0 Comments

Filed under Civil rights, law