|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Australia
& South Pacific
US releases Mamdouh Habib and four British prisoners from
Guantánamo Bay
By Richard Phillips
14 January 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
The Bush administration announced on January 11 that over coming
weeks it will release four British and one Australian detainee
from its Guantánamo Bay prison. The detaineesBritish
citizens Moazzam Begg, 36, Martin Mubanga, 32, Richard Belmar,
25, and Feroz Abbasi, 24, and 48-year-old Australian Mamdouh Habibhave
been imprisoned for almost three years at the American military
prison camp.
None of the men were charged with any offence and cannot be
jailed when returned to their home countries. Once freed, they
are expected to launch damages lawsuits, compensation claims and
other legal action over their illegal imprisonment and treatment.
Habib, Begg and Mubanga have stated in letters or legal documents
that they were physically and psychologically abused at the jail.
Habib was first arrested in Pakistan in October 2001, where he
was beaten by US military interrogators. Then, under American
direction, he was sent to Egypt where he was held for over six
months and tortured. He was transferred back to the US military
in Afghanistan and then Guantánamo Bay in May 2002.
In a brief statement announcing the releases, Washington claimed
to retain security concerns about the five detainees,
but said the British and Australian governments had agreed to
take responsibility and would work to prevent
[the men] from engaging in or otherwise supporting terrorist activities
in the future.
Notwithstanding these so-called security concerns,
which are a pretext for further state harassment, the sudden release
of the men underlines the illegal and arbitrary nature of the
Bush administrations detentions under the war on terror.
After three years of constant interrogations, torture and other
abuse, Washington has decided to release the men because it has
no evidence to charge, let alone convict, them in its kangaroo
court-style military commissions at Guantánamo Bay.
From the outset, Washington claimed that these and other Guantánamo
Bay detainees were dangerous terrorists and could not be freed.
Habib was accused of having prior knowledge of the September 11
attacks on the US, helping to train the hijackers and even planning
to hijack a plane himself.
Six months ago, the Bush administration told British and Australian
government officials that Habib, Begg and Abbasi would be among
a batch of nine detainees who would be charged and brought before
military tribunals. But a combination of increasing legal action
against the detentions, mounting evidence of torture and abuse
of prisoners, and backroom appeals by the British government,
which faces a national election this year, led to Washingtons
release announcement on January 11.
The decision is a major political embarrassment for the Australian
government. Late on Tuesday night an exasperated Phillip Ruddock,
the Australian attorney general, called a press conference to
reveal that Habib would be freed. Ruddock said the Howard government
was disappointed at the way in which this matter has been
handled and wed be very foolish to say otherwise... [I]t
didnt occur in the way in which we would have expected.
The attorney general told the media that the Australian government
had consistently urged the US to bring charges against
Habib or release him, and repeatedly impressed on the US
our desire to see his case dealt with expeditiously and fairly.
The next day, a tetchy Prime Minister John Howard said the process
took too long and we have made that known in plain terms to the
United States.
These claims are ludicrous and contemptible. And they can be
refuted by a cursory examination of the record.
Rather than urge Washington to charge or release
Habib, the Howard government provided the US with a blank cheque
to do what it liked with Habib and 29-year-old David Hicks, the
other Australian citizen currently imprisoned by the US military.
Hicks, who was captured by Northern Alliance forces and handed
over to the US military in December 2001, has been incarcerated
in Guantánamo Bay since January 12, 2002.
The Howard government has wholeheartedly embraced Washingtons
so-called war on terror and publicly defended its violations of
democratic rights in Guantánamo Bay and elsewhere. It has
blocked Freedom of Information access to government documents
by Hicks and Habib family lawyers and the media, and now has the
dubious distinction of being the only government in the world
that has refused to demand the repatriation of its citizens from
Guantánamo Bay.
The Howard government has not just failed to defend the basic
rights of Mamdouh Habib and Hicks, but is deeply complicit in
their illegal detention.
Habibs arrest
Habib was seized by Pakistani police whilst travelling on a
bus from Quetta to Karachi on October 5, 2001, two days before
the onset of the US-led assault on Afghanistan. He had a return
air ticket to Sydney and had planned to fly back within days.
Australian government and media reports claimed that he had
been captured leaving Afghanistan. In fact, he had left his home
in Sydney in late July of that year with the aim of finding an
Islamic school in Pakistan for his children. An outspoken man,
he was seized by Pakistani police after he attempted to defend
the rights of two arrested German bus passengers. The German citizens
were released a few weeks later, after negotiations between the
German and Pakistani governments. The Howard government made no
attempt to secure Habibs release from Pakistani authorities.
Two weeks prior to his detention, Australian Security and Intelligence
Organisation (ASIO) and Australian Federal Police (AFP) officers
conducted an eight-hour raid on Habibs home in Sydney, seizing
various items and terrifying his wife and four children. Details
about his trip to Pakistan and other information gathered in this
raid were no doubt handed over to US intelligence, which passed
it on to Pakistani authorities. From the time he was arrested,
Habib was prevented from making contact with his family or a lawyer.
In late 2001, Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and
Trade officials first told Habibs wife that they had not
been able to gain access to him, but later admitted that ASIO
officers had interrogated her husband in Pakistan.
In May 2002, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer told the National
Press Club that he had no sympathy for Habib and that the Australian
government would do nothing to secure his legal rights. Attorney
General Daryl Williams told the media that the US treatment of
Mamdouh Habib was appropriate. Williams admitted that
Australian intelligence officers would interrogate Habib in Afghanistan,
prior to his transfer to Guantánamo Bay. Although no lawyer
would be present, Williams continued, Habib was not being
denied any of his rights because none of the information
could be used in an Australian court.
Instead of demanding legal and family access and other basic
rights for Habib and Hicks, the Australian government has continuously
alleged that they were hardened terrorists. At the same time,
it has continued to insist that the two men were in good health
and treated well in Guantánamo Bay. It refused to investigate
the mounting evidence that Habib had been tortured in Egypt.
In December 2003, Ruddock told a Sydney Law Society dinner
that Australians could not expect to commit offences in other
countries and then forum shop for a favourable jurisdiction
in which to be heard and expect to come back to Australia. There
seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what we can do
for our nationals overseas whove committed offences,
he said.
A month later, in January 2004, Ruddock declared that repatriation
of Habib and Hicks from Guantánamo Bay would represent
a very significant weakening of our position and send
a message that Australia is soft on terrorists.
When asked by journalists whether serious weight loss by Hicks
was caused by physical and psychological abuse in Guantánamo
Bay, Ruddock cynically declared: When we inquired about
[his weight loss] what we ascertained was that hed been
doing what a lot of Australians do, hed been on a diet and
a fitness regime. And maybe some people want some advice from
him as to how it works.
Howard and Ruddocks disappointment with the release of
Habib is genuine. On the basis of assurances from Washington,
they believed that Habib would be charged, placed before a military
court and sentenced to a lengthy jail term. They no doubt hoped
that this would ensure that Habibs statements on his torture
and mistreatment would be ignored or forgotten.
On January 5, a few days before the Bush administration announced
that he would be repatriated, the US District Court in Washington
released an affidavit detailing the torture and abuse of Habib.
It was submitted to the court last November by Habibs American
lawyer Joe Margulies.
The document not only describes where and how Habib was physically
and psychologically abused, but that Australian officials were
present during the interrogations in Pakistan and witnessed him
being physically assaulted and placed on a plane to Egypt.
One Australian official reportedly watched US guards forcibly
subdue Habib while one of his attackers posed for trophy
photographs with his foot on Habibs neck and then
bundled him into a plane to Egypt.
The affidavit explains that in Egypt he remained handcuffed,
and was regularly kicked, punched and beaten with a stick, rammed
with an electric cattle prod and subjected to water torture. He
was threatened with assault by German shepherd dogs and told by
his jailers that they could induce the dogs to sexually assault
him.
Habib was often suspended from hooks on a wall, his feet on
a drum connected to an electric charge: The action of Mr
Habib dancing on the drum forced it to rotate, and his feet constantly
slipped, leaving him suspended by only the hooks on the wall.
Eventually, Mr Habib was forced to raise his legs, leaving him
to hang by his outstretched arms until he could stand it no longer
and, exhausted, dropped his legs back on to the electrified drum.
This ingenious cruelty lasted until Mr Habib finally fainted.
Subjected to this sadistic brutality, Habib agreed to his Egyptian
interrogators demands, signing a number of confessions.
These were then used to prove he was a terrorist and
justify his transfer back to Afghanistan and incarceration in
Guantánamo Bay in May 2002.
According to legal experts, Habibs vivid description
of his treatment in Egypt is one of the most detailed accounts
to date of the illegal practice of extraordinary rendition,
a method whereby the CIA outsources torture to other
countries. It is expected to form the basis of legal action in
the US against the Bush administration.
Former Pakistan Interior Minister Faisal Saleh Hayat admitted
last year to SBS televisions Dateline program
in Australia that his department handed Habib over to US officials.
Damaging questions are now being raised about the Australian governments
knowledge and involvement in Habibs rendition. Amnesty International
and the Victorian Law Institute are demanding a public investigation
into all aspects of his three-year detention.
New threats
The Howard government is currently involved in discussions
with Washington over the mechanics of Habibs repatriation.
While Ruddock has admitted that Habib cannot be prosecuted under
Australian law, the minister has made clear that the government
intends to maintain constant state surveillance of him.
Ruddock told the ABCs 7.30 Report on Wednesday
that the US considered Habib an enemy combatant and that if
further information were to become known which suggests that offences
have occurred, then charges will be brought.
Habib was a person of security concern, he said,
and competent authorities will do what is appropriate in
relation to him. In other words, the Howard government plans
to establish ongoing monitoring and harassment of Habib and his
family.
NSW Labor Premier Bob Carr immediately endorsed these threats.
Carr told a press conference on Wednesday that he had spoken about
the issue with Ruddock and NSW Police Commissioner Ken Moroney.
The federal attorney general says he [Habib] will remain
a person of interest to the federal police, Carr said. We
will cooperate with the federal police in surveillance of any
person of interest.
Habibs lawyer, Stephen Hopper, told the media that Ruddocks
comments were defamatory and that he would investigate every possible
action to redress the wrongs against my client and his family.
This could include legal action for crimes against humanity, compensation
for Habib, or a defamation suit against the Howard government.
Theres a whole range of options open to us but we
will leave no stone unturned, he declared.
Habibs wife, Maha, told the media that the Howard governments
threats were outrageous. She dismissed suggestions that the government
should issue an apology. To apologise or not is not going
to make any difference. The glass has been broken, they have breached
our human rights and they are the criminals.
Stephen Kenny and Major Michael Mori, lawyers for David Hicks,
have called for the immediate release of their client. Mori said
it would be a travesty and legal double-standard if Hicks were
not freed at the same time as Habib.
See Also:
Support for our struggle is growing
Father of Guantánamo Bay prisoner speaks with WSWS
[13 January 2005]
Prisoner releases
expose illegal nature of Guantánamo Bay detentions
[1 October 2004]
New Guantánamo
Bay torture allegations incriminate Australian government
[12 August 2004]
Howard government
backs US incarceration of second Australian in Camp X-Ray
[13 May 2002]
Howard government
complicit in detention of Australian citizen by US military
[26 April 2002]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |