Ahmed Zaoui wins again
November 26th, 2004 at 9:57 am by David FarrarOne must respect that the talanted Deborah Manning and co have had a huge number of wins against the Government in the Ahmed Zaoui case. I’d rather not be paying for it, but as an advocate she has done amazingly well.
As most will know, the Supreme Court has ruled Zaoui can apply for bail, and to stop further “oppressive” delays have said they will hear the application themselves. It is inevitable he will be granted bail.
I actually don’t think this is a bad outcome, even though I do actually think he should be deported and not given refugee status. I’ll explain.
I think Zaoui is ineligible for refugee status on the simple grounds he has multiple criminal convictions overseas. Regardless of terrorist links, that is enough to deny him entry. And there are dozens of countries he could go and live in, without having to return to Algeria. He has voluntarily chosen to leave several perfectly good countries.
I do believe that he had some logistical involement in terrorist groups. Not direct involvement in killing people, but providing things like forged documents which he seems to specialise in.
Now in the NZ context, I do not think he provides a particular threat to our security. He is not going to go and set up a group to start blowing things up in NZ. Having him out on bail is not going to be a threat to anyone.
The problem for the Government is this is the first time a security certificate has been issued, and no-one thought it would take two years to get a final decision. Thus the statute did not allow for release until a final decision is made. The Supreme Court has basically said well there is a common law right to bail regardless.
So as I said I hope that eventually Zaoui is not allowed to stay, simply because he voluntarily left perfectly good other countries to come here and he does have multiple convictions. But I do not think two years in jail awaiting a decision is a great look (even noting he can end it at any time be leaving NZ) and hell we have far far worse people walking the streets thanks to Labour’s early parole laws.
No tag for this post.
November 26th, 2004 at 10:50 am
The current court process is nothing to do with refugee status; that has already been settled in Zaoui’s favour by the RSAA. Instead, it’s about the security risk certificate, and the grounds upon which it must be assessed. If the SRC is upheld, Zaoui may be deported, but the Court of Appeal has set the bar for deporting a genuine refugee very high indeed.
Vote:November 26th, 2004 at 1:14 pm
Release him, bill him, deport him. Let Malaysia deal with him.
Vote:November 26th, 2004 at 1:19 pm
EDH, you forgot to sack the brainless and incompetent RSAA.
Vote:November 26th, 2004 at 5:27 pm
Never thought I would miss the gnome but that pathetic sympathising interview by his replacement caused me to switch to sky quick. Zaoui shouldn’t have been let off the plane. Who cares what the look is, not our friends(former allies) the coalition of the willing.
Vote:November 26th, 2004 at 7:42 pm
I’d rather restructure them out of existence saves on law suits.
Vote:November 26th, 2004 at 8:09 pm
Put him in a Hercules, strap a parachute to his back and push him out of the plane over Algeria. An absolute farce that he was held in detention for 2 years and going no-where. The Supreme Court had to break the impasse. I must say I am impressed with the ballsy decisions of the Supreme Court, but I imagine the Government is not. As a strong supporter of the Court I am delighted with its approach.
Vote:November 27th, 2004 at 9:02 am Vote:
November 27th, 2004 at 10:02 am
“Malaysia has a history of deporting refugees back to the countries they are fleeing from”
So has NZ. remember the Sri lankan girl!!
So when he has convictions they are based on ‘expediency’,but if the RSAA comes up with something its the fount of all knowledge?
Alex you really have to do much better than that
The RSAA is more like the Disputes Tribunal where the other side doesnt turn up, but the claimaints make their case up with lies. The Immigration Dept never turns up to contest the ‘orchestrated litany of lies’ that are most cases, but it doesnt matter since most of these people’s fabrications are obvious.
Vote:As for the man of peace, a silly play on the islamic worlds so called ‘house of peace’ as opposed to the wests ‘house of strife’.
There has been a very clever legal strategy, to constantly go to court so the basics of his case cant be evaluated and to prevent him being deported quickly as he is before the courts. The bail application is part of this , by getting him out of custody, its very hard then to deport him quickly( back to the courts, every single one).
Its ironic that its claimed he is being held ‘without trial’ when he has had nothing but court hearings. Interestingly a person in an unrelated case faces jail because of their refusal to testify, not a word about being imprisoned without trial over this
November 27th, 2004 at 7:34 pm
alex the rsaa would take everyone if they could but they have to reject at least 80% so we are not overun.
Vote:by the way zaouis poem on tv was a real academy
award effort as the friars of the catholic church
zaoui says he wants to go into there care as a tactical ploy to appear that he is secular and into interfaith unity and susan wood fell for it.
November 27th, 2004 at 7:41 pm
sorry alex I almost forgot what infact you are
saying is that nz is the world new privy council
and anyone who has a conviction in france and belgium can escape to nz and have our courts retry
someone until an equital is obtained and dont say wait a minute that is what infact your argument
comes to.
Again it is more ammo for the left to get a boot in at the right.
Vote:November 28th, 2004 at 4:04 pm Vote:
November 28th, 2004 at 4:07 pm Vote:
November 28th, 2004 at 4:11 pm
sorry alex I almost forgot what infact you are
saying is that nz is the world new privy council
and anyone who has a conviction in france and belgium can escape to nz and have our courts retry
someone until an equital is obtained and dont say wait a minute that is what infact your argument
comes to.
Your summary of what you perceive as my argument is not correct. As a sovereign nation, NZ has the right to determine the validity of overseas court cases in relation to an application for refugee status. The decision of the RSAA does not override the Belgian of French decisions, but merely examines them to determine whether they are grounds to exclude Ahmed Zaoui from protection as a refugee. Looking at the actual facts of the cases, no evidence is presented that Ahmed Zaoui actually committed a ‘serious non-political crime’.
Vote:December 1st, 2004 at 7:38 pm
spot on alex as a sovreign nation nz can tell the un to go to hell.
Vote:December 4th, 2004 at 10:00 pm
Well done Alex your opinions are intelligent,articulate and well researced. It is indeed unfortunate that the opinions of those who advocate for Ahmed’s deportation are so badly misinformed of the facts of Zaoui’s case. Their arguments are at best weak and at worse fundamentalist ravings.
The RSAA (no soft touch) has accorded him refugee status, the SIS has had 2 years to make a case against Zaoui however, they have yet to provide any credible evidence to their claims. Ahmed has never been charged with anything. He has been forced to go to the New Zealand courts to ask why he has been arbitarily detained and denied the right accorded to anyone on our shores who, is charged with a penal offence. Charge him or, release him and cancel the Security Risk certificate issued against him.
As for his detractors, I wonder why the sudden trust in the French government and its courts. The rainbow warrior bombing and the nuclear testing on Mururoa Atoll would indicate that the French government are not above terrorism themselves.
Calls to “send him home”, “strap a parachute to his back and drop him over Algeria” are all calls to have another human being killed and tortured.
I also have cause to wonder why these people find it so hard to believe that he is a man of peace and a “passionate advocate for peace”. I guess people who would advocate for the death of a husband and father by suggesting that “he is not our problem” and “put him on a plane and send him back where he came from” are incapable of understanding that we have a moral duty towards our fellow human beings.
Ahmed is a human being therefore, as a member of our species and his wellbeing and that of his family are our concern. Just because the planet has been geographically, economically, politically, socially and culturally divided does not mean that people who are not New Zealander’s are not of our species.
The real threat to our national security and way of life are those who seek to limit our civil liberties and minimise human value in our democratic nation.
We have been given the gift of life by forces greater than ourselves so perhaps, giving Ahmed and his family sanctuary from those that seek to take their lives from them, is the only option we have as human beings. I for one would not be able to send an innocent (and under our law he is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.)man to his death.
P.S Well done to those Aucklanders who exercised their civil right to free speech today outside the ACRP. Arohanui.
Vote: