Hicks: Major Mori speaks : Melbourne Indymedia

Reason #2: Invented charges do not stick

Major Mori, the militry lawyer chosen to represent Australian detainee David Hicks, has been conducting yet another speaking tour of Austarlia. Speaking to an audience of 550, Mori was highly critical of the Bush administration?fs new Military Commissions Act.

And now that all the old charges against Hicks have been dropped as a result of the Hamdan vs Rumsfeld Supreme Court decision, Mori felt free to explain to his audience why the United States case against Hicks was bound to collapse in any event.

From: http://cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=17617

November 19th, 2006
Lachlan Malloch

Mori, who plans to visit Hicks in December, described the oppressive conditions at ?gCamp 5??. He said it is a myth that Hicks is fine, adding that he faces a grim future of delays and litigation in the US Federal Court.

The Military Commission Act 2006 has been designed to circumvent several aspects of the old military commission system that the Supreme Court ruled illegal in the Hamdan v Rumsfeld decision in June. In particular, it tries to prevent another Hamdan-style ruling, which resulted in the former charges against Hicks being dropped. Mori said that US military prosecutors have privately admitted that they didn?ft have the evidence to prove ?gconspiracy?h, something Mori said has never been part of international rules governing war.

Hicks was also charged with ?gattempted murder by an unprivileged belligerent?h. ?gThey made that one up?h, Mori told ABC TV in August. The essence of the charge, he told the meeting, is to make it a crime to resist a foreign invasion. That?fs basically what the alleged ?gTaliban?h, such as Hicks, were doing when they were captured by Northern Alliance/US forces, he added.

The previous charge against Hicks of ?gaiding the enemy?h was also dropped because it was legally untenable for the US to expect a ?gduty of allegiance?h from anyone other than its own citizens.

There is an important lesson there for all those GTMO devotees in the Bush administration: Invented charges do not stick. David Hicks is quite exceptional in detainee terms. Out of 770 originals that were transported to the camp, only ten have ever been charged and Hicks was one of those ten. Major Mori has gone public to explain that the old charges against his client were spurious. It follows that any new charges will also be spurious.

In no way under any circumstances should you let Mr. Hicks near a regular court.

****

Major Mori then went on to explain some of the workings of the Military Commissions Act passed by congress.

The new military commission law strips detainees of the centuries-old right to be brought before a court of law. While it explicitly declares compliance with the Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners of war, section 948b(g) prohibits detainees from invoking their rights under the convention. The act also allows the prosecution to bring evidence obtained under torture into court, whereas the defense counsel is denied access to classified information.

Mori criticised the act for placing the onus on the defense to show that the prosecution?fs evidence is unreliable. Evidence obtained under torture before December 30, 2005, is admissible, but inadmissible if it took place subsequently. ?gI?fm guessing most of the torture took place before that date?h, Mori surmised.

According to Mori, ?g All it would take is for the attorney-general to make a telephone call [to Washington] and David would be coming home?h. But the Australian government has a political problem, he said, because for five years they?fve labeled Hicks an ?gaccused terrorist?h or a ?gterror suspect?h. They?fve admitted that if Hicks was brought home they could not charge him with anything because he has not committed a crime under Australian law. Mori believes the Howard government is still hoping the US will do the dirty work for them.

SOURCE: Green Left.org.au

http://www.theponyexpress.org/wordpress/?p=133