AJUDGEdeferred the trial of Werribee terror suspect Jack Thomas following the unrelated publicity surrounding last week’s raids in Melbourne and Sydney.
Mr Thomas was due to stand trial yesterday, but Victorian Supreme Court judge Justice Philip Cummins postponed the case until 30 January next year following his lawyer’s appeal last Thursday.
Lawyer Lex Lasry QC told the court that claims that last week’s anti-terror raids averted a “catastrophic attack” made it impossible for Mr Thomas to receive a fair trial.
The 32-year-old is charged with receiving financial support from al-Qaeda, and providing it with resources or support to help it carry out a terrorist attack. He is also charged with holding a false passport.
Mr Thomas pleaded not guilty to receiving money from al-Qaeda, but has not entered pleas on the other charges.
The father of two was one of the first men to be charged under Australia’s changed anti-terrorism laws on 18 November 2004.
Almost a year to the week later, Hoppers Crossing 21-year-old Aiman Joud became the second man from Wyndham to be charged under the terrorism laws.
While the charges were unrelated, the two men coincidently shared the same solicitor, lived within five kilometres of each other and were raided by ASIO and Federal Police in the dead of the night as their families watched helplessly.
Both were charged under the Criminal Code Act 1995, not the new laws rushed through Senate after Prime Minister John Howard told the nation of an imminent national security threat.
While Aiman Joud could face 10 years in jail, Mr Thomas faces 50.
Mr Thomas’ high profile solicitor, Rob Stary, has taken on the cases of all nine Melbourne men charged last week.
Mr Stary said Mr Lasry QC, as barrister, will run the legal argument at Mr Thomas’ trial through the Supreme Court.
“First, Jack Thomas has been charged under the old laws and they still apply,” Mr Stary said.
“The nine people that are now being charged for being a member of a terrorist organisation, are also charged under the old legislation.”
As a result, their trials will also be heard similarly.
Mr Stary said the Government would also invoke national security information acts, meaning the cases could be heard in secrecy.
“And I suspect it will be held partially in secrecy at least,” he said. Mr Stary said the amendments the Howard Government sought to pass last week, when they recalled the Senate, had nothing to do with the charges laid last week on all 17 men.
“Just goes to show that the new law was not needed despite what they said,” Mr Stary said.
Lawyer Marika Dias of Brimbank Melton Community Legal Service convenes an anti-terrorism laws task group for the Federation of Community Legal Services.
The task group provides education to community groups on the anti-terrorism laws, and gains feedback to monitor the effect of the laws.
Ms Dias said the community had shown a “hefty response” against the laws, but their effects were too early to judge.
She said more than 150 public appeal submissions against the amendments had been made to the Senate by last Thursday.
She was concerned that government and law enforcement officials were taking advantage of people who didn’t understand the laws.
Ms Dias said government and police were irresponsibly commenting that they believed the men arrested last week were guilty of a terrorist offence.
“By saying we’ve prevented an imminent terrorist attack, you’re basically saying that these men committed a terrorist offence.
“So, essentially what you’re doing is presuming their guilt rather than their innocence,” Ms Dias said.
“The prospects of them getting a fair trial are really impeded by that.
“Particularly when you look at the fact that the government has been coming out and saying: look we told you so – we did need these new laws passed so quickly.
“And yet, that wasn’t an accurate way of presenting things, because those new laws weren’t relied upon,” she said.
“As a sequence of events it does look suspicious.”
