This week an excellent article was published by Dr Michael Head – Associate Professor of Law at the University of Western Sydney – entitled, “Asylum seekers and ASIO’s abuse of power“. Dr Head sees Sheikh Mansour’s case as illustrative of the way in which our security organistion (ASIO) has become ‘legally unchallengeable’ – a situation that Professor Head describes as a ‘grave worry’.

Also in the news this week are two excellent articles from Press TV:

• “The Curious Case of an Iranian Cleric” and
• “Iranian Cleric denied justice in Australia“

Yet the final word on the deportation must be given to Mansour’s family – both to his three sons who have been left behind, and to his faith community, who put together the second of these two videos:

To hear the wonderful Tripple J interview with Mansour’s son, Ali, given on the day of his dad’s deportation, click here.

For more articles and videos, I’d suggested checking out this section of the World News site that contains dozens of articles and images and about 50 videos on Sheikh Mansour’s case (many of which I had not seen before).

It was an emotional time.  Indeed, I find it hard to watch the video coverage below without the tears welling up again.

The story was also covered briefly on Ten News. You can see that here.

The fight does not end here. The Australian Government has until Ocotber 21st to respond to the United Nations Human Rights Committee and explain why they charged, judged and executed Sheikh Mansour without ever telling him what he’d done wrong.

If you have any ideas as to how we can put pressure on the Australian government to respond to the United Nations, submit them to the Fighting Fathers Forum (nb. you’ll need to use VIP code ‘NO HOMERS’ to register).

The gathering will take place at the Imam Husain Islamic Centre (6 Lang Road, Earlwood). It will not include dinner as the team felt that numbers would be impossible to estimate and probably impossible to cater for.

Everyone is invited. It will be a painful time in so many ways, and yet we intend to close this chapter of our campaign with dignity and thankfulness, believing that the battle for Mansour’s fundamental human rights can yet be won, and that our relationship with him is by no means over, even if, for a time, he will not be with us in person.

The quote is with reference to the way the Australian government persuaded the United Nations to withdraw their request for a stay on the deportation of Sheikh Mansour Leghaei, on the basis that they are not actually breaking up his family.

The government claimed that because they had given visas to Mansour’s wife and youngest son that they were therefore not damaging the family unit. Hoever, in reality, the Sheikh and his wife and daughter will be forced to head back to Iran with Mansour, thus leaving three sons in Australia and breaking the family in half.

As the article also makes clear though, the United Nations is still pursuing the Australian government over concerns that Australia has violated fundamental human rights treaties to which it is signatory in the way it has treated Sheikh Mansour (eg. the right of every person to a fair trial). The government has been given until October 21st to respond to the United Nations’ concerns.  Read the full article here.

Another major media outlet to cover the Sheikh’s story is Al-Jazeera. As well as the clip displayed below, Al-Jazeera is considering a full-length documentary concerning the Sheikh’s treatment.

I, as a person from the Middle East, I know better than anybody what Islam is. Although I know that there are a lot of fanatic Muslim people, I found in the Sheikh a moderate one that can be used to be a bridge between the fanatic and the moderate. He can help Australia for the best.

Throwing out the good people is a lack of wisdom from the part of the Government. In the Middle East I found also a lot of fanatic Jewish who impose themselves on the governments and especially on the US Congress and Senate. I am sure that they do the same in Australia, they do it every where in the world.  I saw also Christian fanatics, like the Christian who call themselves Evangelical Zionists.

Treating all the same way that we treat the good Sheikh can show that we are working the same justice for all. Treating only the Muslims this weird way and forgetting or forgiving the others is racism against one group.

Msgn. Labib Kobti

Sheikh Mansour is to be deported without trial. Despite living peacefully for 16 years in Australia and raising a family of four children, the government is deporting him without giving him any explanation.

Shortly after this photo was taken, the officer asked the girl to take down her sign

For a sildeshow of the whole album, click here.

Dr Tony Campolo, President of the Evangelical Association for the Promotion of Education and a world-renowned speaker and author, recently voiced his concern over the Sheikh’s case (see his comment here).  And now Father Kevin Dance, who represents the Passionist Community (of the Catholic Church) to the United Nations has written to the Australian Prime Minster in the letter reprinted below.

These men join other prominent Christian leaders world-wide, including Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa and Bishop Riah of Jerusalem, in appealing for justice for Sheikh Mansour.

From the representative of the Passionist Community to the United Nations

The Hon Kevin Rudd MP
Prime Minister of Australia
Parliament House Canberra
ACT 2600

June 9, 2010

Dear Mr. Prime Minister

Re: Request to prevent the deportation of Sheikh Mansour Leghaei in accordance with the communication of the United Nations Human Rights Committee of 21 April, 2010.

I write this letter in support of the petition that Sheikh Mansour Leghaei not be deported  from Australia until the United Nations Human Rights Committee has completed its investigation of the matter.

I presently represent the worldwide Passionist community at the United Nations. Here I am involved in much interfaith cooperation in the service of peace.  Prior to this assignment, I was Parish Priest of St. Brigid’s Catholic Church in Marrickville which is adjacent to Earlwood where the Imam Husain Islamic Centre is located.

I do not know Dr. Leghaei personally, but I have confidence in the sound judgement of many within the interfaith community, including my successor Father John Pearce, who know him as a man of peace. He is committed to promoting harmony in his own community and within the wider community of Sydney.  Surely, in our multicultural society of Australia, we need people of the caliber and with the leadership that this man has shown.

He has lived at peace in Australia with his family for more than 15 years.  His application for Permanent Residence in Australia has been denied, but he has never been given a chance to clear his name as the allegations made against him by ASIO have never been made known to him. This is a denial of natural justice and of his civil and political rights.

I ask you to intervene and call for a stay in executing the deportation order on Dr. Leghaei until the Human Rights Committee makes its report. This is not a sign of weakness but, rather, a statement of the basic decency and respect for human rights that does and should represent the best that is Australian.

Yours sincerely,

Father Kevin Dance, C.P.
REPRESENTING THE PASSIONIST FAMILY AT THE UNITED NATION

In Franz Kafka’s novel The Trial, an ordinary man finds himself trapped inside the byzantine processes of a shadow justice system. When he asks what he has done wrong, the bureaucrats reply, “It’s not our job to tell you that.”

When he goes to court, he and his lawyers are not allowed to see any of the evidence against him.

His faceless accusers always remain unknown to him. Inevitably, in a system such as this, he is found guilty. All around him, life continues as normal, as if the fair trial of one man is of no concern to the world.

Kafka’s story is a terrifying glimpse into a world which, on the surface, claims to be ruled by law, but in reality is one where the modern bureaucratic state exercises total control over the individual. The individual’s right to be treated decently is extinguished for an unknown greater good. Kafka was writing about rising authoritarianism in early 20th-century Europe, but he could well have been describing Australia’s migration and security laws.

Mansour Leghaei is a long-term resident of Australia soon to be deported to Iran on national security grounds. All he has been told by the intelligence agency ASIO is he is a risk to national security. He has been shown no evidence by ASIO or in any of the court proceedings he brought to challenge ASIO’s assertion.

Absurdly, he has received letters from the authorities asking him to answer the allegations against him, when he has no idea what they are. A Federal Court judge observed his right to procedural fairness had been reduced to ”nothingness”.

Because Australia has no bill of rights, in Leghaei’s case, Australian law cares nothing for the right to a fair hearing of foreigners in security cases. This places Australia in direct breach of its international law obligations under the human rights treaties which it agreed to. Human rights law recognises the importance of a country’s security concerns, but requires minimum guarantees of fairness for an affected person.

The Australian approach is at odds with much of the liberal democratic world. In Britain and continental Europe, which face greater security threats than Australia, human rights law requires a person to be told the substance of the allegations. Sources and informants and other sensitive information can be protected, but an affected person must always receive a summary of the reasons and evidence. That delicate balancing of interests is a sign of living in a civilised society bound by the rule of law.

The denial of a fair hearing is foreign to our ancient common law tradition. The common law depends on an adversarial process, in which a person can challenge the evidence against them. Only be exposing allegations to the harsh light of day can their truth be tested.

Allegations may be false, informants may bear grudges, conduct may have innocent explanations, and intelligence may be misinterpreted. Few can forget that Iraq was invaded in 2003 based on botched intelligence; no reasonable Australian can have blind faith in ASIO.

Where a person is unable to see or test the evidence, it cannot possibly be determined whether the person is actually a risk to national security or not. Deporting Leghaei in such circumstances would be arbitrary, capricious, and internationally unlawful.

It would also deprive Australia of a moderate religious leader and voice of tolerance, as well as depriving his children, who are Australian citizens, of their father. As a Federal Court judge said: “His deportation may well cause hardship to utterly blameless Australian citizens and permanent residents”.

For that reason, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has ordered Australia not to deport him until the UN has ruled on his complaint against Australia.

The UN’s temporary order aims to prevent the ”irreparable harm” to the Leghaei’s family life which will result if he is torn apart from his wife and children – including his 14-year-old daughter, who will lose her father – by deportation. The UN’s order is binding under international law, necessary to ensure the procedural integrity of the complaints system.

While the Rudd government talks the talk of human rights and global governance, signing up to every treaty under the sun, it is in individual cases the rubber hits the road.

By announcing that it will deport Leghaei in defiance of the UN’s order, the government has revealed its true colours and its contempt for international law.

Its commitment to the UN system is flaky and selective. Kafka Kevin’s hypocrisy is remarkable, particularly when a tedious and splenetic Opposition turns up the heat on immigration.

Leghaei’s request of the government is not radical: tell him what he has supposedly done, let him explain it, and only then deport him if the allegations are true.

That is what a fair and civilised society ruled by law would do.

No Australian can have confidence in our security where it is based on faceless accusers and secret evidence – and where ordinary people are judged in the shadow of the law.

Assoc. Professor Ben Saul