Separate Terrorism Trial Revealed
Sydney Morning Herald
Wednesday September 17, 2008
ABDUL NACER BENBRIKA and four of his followers are alleged to have committed other terrorism offences that will be tried separately next year.
Benbrika, Aimen Joud, Fadl Sayadi and Ahmed Raad are charged with having planned or prepared for a terrorist act by placing an order with a company called Haines Educational for laboratory equipment - beakers and arm brackets - to be used to make an explosive. Separately, Joud and Shane Kent are charged with two other counts. They are alleged to have intentionally provided support to the terrorist organisation al-Qaeda in a way that would directly or indirectly foster the doing of a terrorist act. They are also charged with making a document connected with preparation for a terrorist act, knowing of that connection. These charges relate to their alleged contribution to an international internet video.The other charges can be revealed now that the jury has delivered its final verdicts in the first trial of Benbrika and 11 others. Yesterday a Victorian Supreme Court jury found Amer Haddara, 28, guilty of being a member but not guilty of being in possession of a computer connected with a terrorist act. The jury could not reach a verdict on whether Kent, 31, had been a member. Just minutes before it was announced the verdicts were ready, Justice Bernard Bongiorno refused an application to discharge the jury, which had been deliberating for 23 days following a seven-month trial. The lawyer for Kent, John O'Sullivan, argued that the jury might have been influenced by comments made yesterday by the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, welcoming the guilty verdicts delivered on Monday against Benbrika and five others. It is normally risking contempt of court to comment on a case before a jury has finished. Antony Trood, the lawyer for Haddara, told the judge: "One shakes one's head in amazement at the idea that he would say it." Justice Bongiorno said, "We all do ... It's abundantly clear that it would have been to the advantage of the system of justice in this country if these comments had not been made." Mr McClelland's office did respond to requests for comment last night. Outside the court, the solicitor for five of the accused, Robert Stary, said the comments "beggared belief". Mr McClelland needed to claim the prosecution was successful, "as does the [Australian Federal Police] and the intelligence community because we have spent $20 billion in this country in pursuing cases against inconsequential figures," he said. "When these men were arrested, they said that an imminent terrorist attack had been thwarted. Well, unfortunately, they could not identify any imminent terrorist attack by these 12 men. Four of them, of course, have been found not guilty." Mr Stary said "These are political prosecutions, they've been shown to be political prosecutions. And history, unfortunately, will indict the Howard, Ruddock and Downer regime together with the failure by the current government to act adequately in reviewing these counter- terrorism laws." Greg Barns, the lawyer for Ezzit Raad, said his client was considering an appeal. The mufti of Australia, Sheik Fehmi Naji el-Imam, issued a statement saying the Muslim community was relieved the trial was over and was confident the accused had the opportunity to protest their innocence. "The reaction from the Muslim community to the verdicts is one of mixed emotions, as many people know of these men and empathise with the hardship that their families have endured to date and will continue to endure."
© 2008 Sydney Morning Herald
Share This