Mohamed Haneef sues former immigration minister for loss of earnings

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/haneef-sues-former-immigration-minister-for-loss-of-earnings/story-e6frg6nf-1225886884896

CLEARED terror suspect Mohamed Haneef is suing former immigration minister Kevin Andrews.

He is demanding the Liberal frontbencher pay the difference between what he is earning as a doctor in the Middle East and what he might have made in Australia.

Dr Haneef's lawyers also filed a claim against the Australian government yesterday for unspecified financial damages arising from his arrest and lengthy detention in 2007, when he was wrongly accused of being involved in failed bombings in Britain.

The former Gold Coast Hospital registrar has gone after Mr Andrews personally for alleged defamation, citing interviews the then minister gave detailing or inferring that he was party to the overseas terrorism plot.

Dr Haneef, who is now working as a general practitioner in Dubai, alleges defamatory statements by Mr Andrews cost him pay and career advancement.

A statement of claim filed yesterday in the Queensland Supreme Court asserts that Dr Haneef received no income from December 21, 2007 - the date the work visa Mr Andrews had revoked was restored by the full Federal Court - until he took up his current contract in Dubai in July 2008.

He now earned less than he did on the Gold Coast and had lost the opportunity to train in Australia as a specialist physician and progress his medical career.

Dr Haneef's claim against the government states that as a result of his "false imprisonment and malicious prosecution" he experienced stress, hurt, humiliation and loss of liberty, for which he was entitled to damages.

His lawyer, Rod Hodgson, of law firm Maurice Blackburn, said last night Mr Andrews was being sued for defamation in the expectation the Howard government minister would be indemnified by the current Labor government.

"We are going after Mr Andrews in a personal capacity but in expectation that . . . because he made his comments in his capacity as a minister that he would be covered," Mr Hodgson said last night.

A spokesman for Mr Andrews, who holds the opposition portfolios of families, housing and human services, said the law suit was now with the MP's lawyers, and he would not discuss it.

The department and office of the federal Attorney-General also declined to comment.

Mr Hodgson said there had been "preliminary discussions" with the government to settle the case out of court. Dr Haneef's objective was a "global resolution" of both actions. "We remain pretty confident that the government wants this blight on Australian history expunged," he said.

Mr Hodgson declined to say how much compensating Dr Haneef would cost the taxpayer, except that "we are talking about considerable" loss of income and future earnings.

The foreign-trained doctor was arrested at Brisbane airport on July 2, 2007, while attempting to board a flight home to India. At the time, he was alleged by Australian Federal Police to have been linked to an attempted car bombing in London and the bid by Islamist terrorists, including his fatally injured cousin, Kafeel Ahmed, to crash a blazing Jeep into Glasgow airport.

A mobile phone SIM card belonging to Dr Haneef was said to have been found in the wreckage of the car, when this was not the case. He was charged with a single count of recklessly supporting a terrorist organisation and held in custody, but this was withdrawn 25 days later for lack of evidence.

Later, an inquiry headed by John Clarke QC found there had been no evidence to link Dr Haneef to the failed attacks.

Dr Haneef's statement of claim against the government for unspecified damages for wrongful imprisonment and malicious prosecution, alleges that the officer in charge of the AFP investigation, Commander Ramzi Jabbour, knew within a week of Dr Haneef's arrest there was insufficient evidence with which to charge him.

The statement of claim alleges that Commander Jabbour's action in charging and prosecuting Dr Haneef was improper and motivated by malice.

It would certainly make for an interesting case, if it were to proceed far enough in the court system for the facts behind the case to be thoroughly examined, but I fear that will not be the likely outcome.
I expect that a heap of money will be thrown in his direction with a please shut the heck up, attached to it.

The issues I would like to know a lot more about, would be just what evidence was presented to Mr Andrews, and who compiled the evidence.
I remember at the time, making comments about the politicisation of the case by Andrews, as seeming highly improper, and if it turns out that in fact there was NO evidence to support the charges laid against Mr Haneef, then the former Minister, and the former PM, to whom he answered, should be called to explain in front of a judge, what drove their actions.
There is also the possibility that Mr Haneef was "supportive" of extremist Islamist politics, and if so, the extent of that support should also be thoroughly examined.

I would love to see the real truth revealed fully, and if we the taxpayers have to foot the bill for it, then we have a right to know exactly what went on behind the closed doors of the former Liberal government.

There can be little doubt, that the Haneef case was a cynical and shameful political stunt, by the Howardian Libs - who actively demonised and vilified an innocent man, in order to self-servingly pervert the course of justice...

Then there was Abbott & Co's vexatious abuse of our legal system to destroy a political opponent in Hanson. Not that I support Hanson in any way, but I have no doubt that she was a vulnerable victim of powerfully-partisan sewer politics - Abbott & Co cynically usurped the authority of the AEC and judiciary. Her case ought never have been spilled over into our courts by members of any political party!

Didn't this topic come back to bite the original poster on the ar$e?