Parkin dismisses ASIO investigation : Melbourne Indymedia

San Francisco, 6 December 2005: Deported US peace activist Scott Parkin has dismissed a report on his treatment released Inspector General of Intelligence Services as "unfair" and challenged on Attorney-General Philip Ruddock to reveal the specific allegations that led ASIO to issue an adverse security assessment against him.

"I have a fifteen year history as a nonviolent activist. I teach nonviolent civil disobedience in the tradition of King and Gandhi," Mr Parkin said.

"If Mr Ruddock is so certain of the truth of ASIO's allegations, why can't he tell me what I am supposed to have done so that I can defend himself?"

The report reveals that criteria used by ASIO in issuing an adverse security assessment of Mr Scott Parkin were drawn from a secret "determination" issued by a former head of ASIO in 1990.

The eight-page report, which fails to provide any specific allegations against Mr Parkin, says that a 1990 determination issued by the Director General of Security was used to assess whether Mr Parkin represented a risk to national security on the grounds of "politically motivated violence"

The release of the report, which concludes that "legislative requirements were met" by ASIO in issuing the adverse security assessment, follows ASIO head Paul O'Sullivan's acknowledgement to the Senate Estimates Committee that Mr Parkin was not involved in violence.

The only recommendation made by Mr Carnell is "that the Director-General consider whether the 1990 Determination ... should be reviewed."

The report also confirms that allegations published in The Australian newspaper that Mr Parkin advocated throwing marbles under horses hooves were "not a reliable guide to the ASIO assessment".

A seperate document, "Comments on ASIO security assessment in respect of Mr Scott Parkin", has been kept secret by Mr Carnell on the grounds that "it is in the public interest for security considerations to be given consideration".

Australian supporters of Mr Parkin have dismissed the report as a "whitewash".

"Not only does the report endorse ASIO's decision to brand Scott a security risk without providing any information on what he is alleged to have said or done, the actual criteria used to judge whether he was a threat are being kept both from Scott and from the public," said Iain Murray, a friend of Mr Parkin's.

"To claim that national security is being upheld by keeping ASIO's allegations secret is absurd. Scott is a peace activist who has only ever espoused nonviolent means of protest, who is now on the other side of the planet."

The decision to keep the specific allegations against Mr Parkin secret was "Kafkaesque", Mr Murray said.

Expressing concern for the state of democracy in Australia, Mr Parkin said: "Democracies are supposed to have a transparent system of checks and balances. Obviously this isn't the case here."

Isn't Parkin being somewhat disingenuous? I'd like full disclosure from him about any activities that might have made the government issue this ruling.

so when did you...
by .. give up hitting your wife? Thursday December 08, 2005 at 01:56 PM

"I'd like full disclosure from him about any activities that might have made the government issue this ruling".

This statement seems to be in the same mode.

'Activities'? What activities? and as ASIO won't say what these supposed activities are, it makes them very difficult to refute them.

Isn't there a provision in the anti-liberty bill that says it is a 'crime' to talk about specific details and stuff if you get nicked?

Its seems like a vicious cycle. Just the way it was supposed to be.