I grumbled the other day (or was it earlier today? Infant induced insomia is a wondrous thing ...) about the absurdity of Kevin Andrews canceling Mohammed Haneef's visa because he had some wannabe-terrorist cousins.
An Australian judge has confirmed my hunch that Andrews has opted for a hysterically (or a cold-blooded, deliberately) simplistic interpretation of Section 501:
An Australian judge today questioned the immigration department’s interpretation
of the character test used to revoke the visa of Indian doctor Mohammed Haneef, saying even he would fail the test because of his association with people
suspected of criminal conduct.
Haneef has been charged with providing support to the suspects in the failed UK terror plot.
Justice Jeffrey Spender, who set Haneef's appeal against the cancellation of his visa for hearing on August 8, asked the grounds Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews used to justify his view that he had a reasonable suspicion that the Indian doctor had an association with terrorists.
“Unfortunately, I wouldn't pass the character test on your statement because I’ve been associated with people suspected of criminal conduct,” Justice Spender told the immigration department's counsel. The counsel said he himself would fail the test if he were a non-citizen. (1)
1 - "Judge questions grounds for move on Haneefs visa'," Press Trust Of India / Melbourne, July 19, 2007. (http://www.business-standard.com/economy/storypage.php?leftnm=3&subLeft=1&chklogin=N&autono=291640&tab=r)
No comments:
Post a Comment