Hicks wins British citizenship
AUSTRALIAN terrorist suspect David Hicks, held in the US prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, has won his court battle for British citizenship, which could pave the way for his eventual release.
The High Court handed down its decision in London.
I presume there is an avenue of appeal but we’ll just have to wait and see if the Brits use it. I feel a bit uneasy about the High Court forcing the Brit government to accept our trash. They have enough problems of their own.
The Times Online carrys the story as well
Facebook
Twitter
Kev, I assume that he will continue to be detained within the British Justice system?
RD, given that they haven’t detained the others that they had released from gitmo, I wouldn’t bet on it. In the end it’s up to the US if they release him, but most likely will if asked.
From what has been said of British law relating to citizenship, I gather that they have to accept anyone who has a British parent. I’m guessing they don’t have a good charachter requirement or he’d surely fail on that count. They can probably try and block him administratively (i.e. demand that he applies in person) but I doubt that will happen either.
If it were simply a case of offloading our rubbish on them, then I would say that if they accept his bid for citizenship, he’s their problem. Unfortunately he would also retain his Australian citizenship and I doubt that the Australian government can stop an Australian citizen from coming to Australia. They also probably can’t detain or charge him here over anything he did in Afghanistan (if they could I would have been willing to give much more consideration to appeals for him to be brought here for trial).
If Hicks becomes an English citizen, what is to stop him heading back to Australia on the first flight out?
He apparently can’t be prosecuted here because we didn’t have any laws against being a traitor somewhere else in the world, and the new ones are not retrospective.
I also find it grimly amusing that we are sending Australian criminals to England.
I’d think we could pull his Aust passport (what with being a terrorist and all) and then PNG ‘Dave Hicks, Brit Terrorist’ so he can’t come here.
Thank god for the High court decision. Fancy locking a man away for 5 years for guarding a tank. Like most other Australian’s who regard “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” as a notion worth more than the urine infestation which Howard’s crew shows it, I’ll be waiting at the airport when the bong boy from Adelaide returns. Then I’ll expect the police to charge him if he’s committed a crime….. and if he hasn’t…. then guess what…. i’ll let him be
That is the poison PQ, British citizenship as a backdoor escape for Hicks from a meeting with a
thoroughly deserved trial, conviction and a stiff penalty, and straight back into Oz. Indeed,
an Oz lawyer for Hicks declared that that is the aim, for Hicks to come straight back.
If so, well he will be, no doubt, celebrtaed as another heroic victim but who manged to get awya with his crimes.
Worse, he will be a hero to Islamo-fascist thugs in Oz, if he manages or, rather, his lawyers, to wangle it.
Obstacles:
He has been charged.
The Brits. have had it up to the gills with Islamo-fascists &their terrorist bruvver scumbags. The Cabinet might not be able to overturn the decision but, that has no bearing they will oblige Hicks by seeking his release.
Must say, while sons and daughters of Brit. citizens can be accorded the same, that does not
entail everyone, certainly criminals and terorrists being accorded it. It might show out the
judges’ reasons are flawed. On the other hand, what on earth are they on about, upholding Hicks has an absolute right to it, and worse, when he is a damned criminal-terrorist. Mad.
Please correct me if I am wrong, as I am unsure with regard to the following. Can’t he be charged for becoming a mercenary? That is if he goes to Britain or Australia.
Isn’t he an alleged terrorist ? Can anyone confirm if he has been found guilty ?
If he retains dual citizenship and each nation has contradictory policies on his internment (which is of itself not at all certain), the US could quite rightly say that they have adopted the Australian position based on his length of Australian citizenship and his citizenship status at the time of the alleged offences. This effectively gives the British an out, and given their resistance to him obtaining citizenship in the first place, it’s probably not something they will protest too loudly about.
If he gives up his Australian citizenship, he no longer has the right of return and could easily be denied a visa. He just wouldn’t be our problem anymore. I dare him to do it.