A win for justice?

The case against Dr. Haneef crumbled to bits and pieces, after Howard, Ruddock and Andrews celebrated this witch hunt as victory in the "war on terror". Now, without a visa, Dr. Haneef has to pay about 120$ per day for his detention, until he goes back to India. As he couldn't pay his rent while he was held without charge, he has lost his flat, which was searched by about 300 police forces to find no evidence.

No one as yet is willing to take responsibility for this act that concerns all foreigners in Australia. The anti-terror laws have no regulations for compensation, as they seem to be designed to make anyone a terrorist, no matter how flimsy the evidence is.

Dr. Haneef isn't the first one who felt the injustice of Australia's anti-terror laws. The Barwon 13 still wait for their trial, after more than a year in solitary confinement in a high-security prison. Faheem Lodhi will spent 22 years in prison for something, that can't even be described as a thought crime. Jack Thomas, by the media prejudiced as Jihad Jack, still suffers from a constraint order, being subjected to a curfew and restrictions which means of communication he is allowed to use.

And finally, David Hicks, who was subjected to five years in American torture camps, is held as a terrorist in jail, and will enjoy a similar constraint order like Jack Thomas, once he is a "free man" again.

David Hicks, Jack Thomas and Dr. Haneef are not allowed to talk about their treatment, which would be essential to determine how Australia treats basic human rights. Human Rights Organisations consider solitary confinement as a form of torture, especially over long periods of time, and all of the former experienced this totalitarian treatment.

So much I would appreciate Philip Ruddock taking his hat for his repeated abuse of the anti-terror laws, I don't see this happen. Mick Keelty might end up to be the scapegoat, and/or Kevin Andrews, but this seems as well not too likely. However, it would satisfy my concept of justice and accountability in a democracy to see some heads rolling, though it wouldn't make up for the damage done to the victims of the witch hunt, nor would anyone pay back the taxpayers money used to pursue this paranoid trials.

Just personal responsibility could move Ruddock, Keelty or Andrews to resign, legally there is no reason. All of them can hide behind the anti-terror laws, which are the core of the problem. This legislation opened a back-door to circumvent to the rule of law, and thus can be abused by anyone in a position of power.

Although the media, especially The Age, played an important role to prevent the next innocent man being subjected to a life in prison, it is far from being innocent. Terrorists are an extremly rare breed, luckily, and the threat posed by them is far less than the threat by car accidents or suicide. However, reporting permanently about terror related topics maintains fear among the population, and the illusion of a real threat. But this paranoia is never backed up by numbers, because the numbers speak simply a different language.

I'm really curious who, if anyone, will take responsibility for this abuse of power. As mentioned, I would appreciate simply abolishing the anti-terror laws, which would automatically prevent especially Ruddock from interfering with the judiciary system.

The damage done to the life and reputation of Dr. Haneef can not be undone. He is one of 20,000 foreign physicians working in Australia (out of 50,000), and at least people from muslim backgrounds might no longer be willing to take the risk of supporting the Australian medical system.

Well done, Mr. Keelty. Well done, Mr. Andrews. Well done, Mr. Ruddock. Well done, Mr. Howard.