Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Attorney-General, Senator Johnston. I refer to quotes from a discussion last night about torture with the commandant of the Guantanamo Bay gulag who said that interrogation approaches are designed to manipulate the detainee’s emotions and weaknesses to gain his willing cooperation and that he hoped that that philosophy had been employed in the interrogation of David Hicks. Do the Attorney-General and this government believe in torture as a means of influencing evidence and/or pleas before a court? Does this government believe that retrospective charges should be part of a criminal justice system?

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Senator for his question. Of course the government does not believe in torture or coercion to obtain confessions. I inform the Senate that today Mr Hicks has entered the plea of guilty to the charge of providing material support for terrorism at his arraignment before a military commission. I should also point out that this man has very competent legal advice. I understand that the judge has requested that the parties file an agreed upon statement of facts on 27 March, Guantanamo Bay time.

To the extent that Senator Brown raises the question as to what has gone before, it would seem rather redundant in the face of an admission which has been afforded to the court. The plea is obviously a matter for Mr Hicks. The government welcomes the fact that Mr Hicks’s case should now be resolved quickly. I underline the fact that there has now been a voluntary plea of guilty to the charge of providing material support for terrorism. The matter, as I say, is for Mr Hicks, his lawyers and the US authorities. Sentencing is a matter for the military commission. I do not believe I can take it much further. The matter is in the care and custody of the commission and it would be inappropriate for me to say anything further.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. How can torture ever be dismissed as redundant? Is the minister not ashamed of that statement and is this government not ashamed of dragging our great judicial system into the mire by compromising and associating it with the corrupt, illegal system in Guantanamo Bay? Aren’t you ashamed?

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senators on my right will come to order.

David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Justice and Customs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not and has never supported the use of torture or coercion to obtain admissions or cooperation in any judicial process. I said that torture was redundant in respect of Mr Hicks because the government is unaware of any matters pertaining to Senator Brown’s question. The fact is that this man has appeared before the commission and has voluntarily entered a plea of guilty to the charge of providing material support for terrorism.