|
There was nothing unusual about the
afternoon of Tuesday
3rd July 2007. In the city there was the
usual '5 pm' rush
on the streets and footpath as people
made their way to
catch their transport. The only big news
at local, national
and perhaps at international level was
the arrest of
Dr. Haneef and the photos of men and
women in black suits
and dark sunglasses “hovering” around Dr
Haneef's rented
apartment in Gold Coast.
And for someone who has a reputation as
a reliable duty solicitor and street
lawyer it was just another day in the
life of a lawyer, until a call at about
5.15pm from a police sergeant at the
Brisbane Watch house. According to Mr.
Russo the sergeant said, 'there's a
bloke down here who needs a lawyer.'
It was perhaps the beginning of a new
chapter that has already raised
questions about transparency and
accountability as it relates to the
manner various government agencies
compile, keep and in many situation may
be using unsubstantiated information
against us. To be precise I am talking
about the human right issues, our right
to have answers regardless of any
circumstances be it a check at customs,
immigration or at the hands of other law
enforcement agencies.
Those of us who have been following Dr.
Mohammed Haneef's case, Peter Russo and
other senior barristers who have been on
the case have, through our courts,
restored faith among those in Australia
whose hopes were fading on human right
issues and self dignity. Full marks to
our judicial system.
Should Mr. Peter Russo be given the
honorary title of 'Indian of the Year?'.
After all some have been made honorary
Indians. Or do we reserve such titles
for politicians who to some extent (as
they are legislators after all) should
share the blame surrounding the Haneef
saga. We will leave that for other time
because that is not topic of this
column. This write-up is about the
person, a solicitor who came to the
rescue of an individual locked away in a
cell where his faith for days remained
unclear.
My first contact with Mr. Peter Russo
was organized by Brisbane Barrister Mr.
Andrew See. When I rang Russo he agreed
to be interviewed and invited me to his
residence. His humble nature is beyond
description. I was proud to be sitting
and taking with him. My photographer who
was there for brief period later
remarked to me “What a dignified, humble
and a brilliant personality, he (Peter)
is.”
INTRODUCTION: “Mr. Russo thank you
for giving me this opportunity to
interview you. I read with interest the
article published on 8 September 07 in
Gold Coast Bulletin. The article has
been written by Mr. Doug Parrington.”
Peter Russo responded, “It is a
pleasure.”
Q. Doug in his article quotes you as
saying that at about 5.15pm on 3rd July
07 you received a call from a sergeant
at Brisbane watch house saying to you
“there's a bloke down here who needs a
lawyer.” When you received that call did
you know at that time that 'that bloke'
was Dr. Mohammed Haneef, and if you had
known it was Haneef, would you have
changed your mind?
A. At that stage, I did not know it was
Haneef. Even if I had known it would not
have changed my mind. People are held at
watch house for a variety of reasons.
Q. Can you describe the situation
when you first met him (Dr. Haneef).
A. When I arrived at the watch house, I
was immediately taken to a room where
the officer pointed to a TV mounted on
the wall, looked like a fish bowl, and
there was a footage of a Jeep burning at
Glasgow Airport. By that time I still
had not connected with the matter. The
officer explained there was an
application for what is known as dead
time which needed to be heard before
6.30pm. I was handed couple of pages of
Crime Act. I then met Dr Mohammed Haneef.
I must have been with Haneef for only
10minutes. I looked at my watch and I
knew I was working against the clock. I
did not want to upset the Magistrate by
turning late. And there I was handling
Haneef's case.
Q. Legal aid is not everyone's cup of
tea. The rates are perhaps not that
attractive. But you persevered with the
case, putting in long hours, in what
appeared [as Doug put it] to be a
David-Goliath battle where an individual
was fighting the might of a government.
Little by little things started coming
out in media and then the 'leak' of the
transcript.
Your persevered, was it because you
believed in Haneef's innocence and you
felt that there were interferences from
the top to 'have Haneef in at any cost?’
A. My involvement was lot to do with
Mohammed Haneef. As you probably know,
you have to listen to your client. Lot
of the knowledge and confidence in the
case comes from him. We spent time
discussing case in a very critical
manner. As a solicitor I had be very
cautious. I had great confidence in him
and what he was telling me. He was very
concerned about his future in terms of
his case with Australian Authorities.
From the very early stages he maintained
that the AFP and the Queensland Police
got it all wrong.
As a person he is a gentleman, very
respectful. He's a typical doctor type.
Very intelligent, very thoughtful, very
considered and measured in his approach
to everything that he does and says. As
I said, as a solicitor I was very
cautious
He has a beautiful manner about him. He
is a typical doctor who will make you
feel better before he gives you a
script. There were moments where we
joked, The situation he was in he
described it as a nightmare. One very
important aspect of what Mohamed was
always saying and doing, is that he was
willing to cooperate with authorities.
One of his first requests that he made
of me, and asked me to put before the
magistrate when they were asking for the
extension of time, was that he be
allowed to go back into the community
and go back to work and that he would
continue to cooperate with them and make
himself available if and when they
wanted to speak to him again. And he was
of the view that he should cooperate
with them and that's what he did.
As for costs we became aware and this
was fairly early in the piece that
Mohammed Haneef would not be able to
meet his legal costs. I consulted the
Brisbane barrister MR. Steven Kein SC
and convinced him that it was a
worthwhile case. Mr. Steven Kein took
the case and we won.
Q. The treatment of Haneef by Law
Enforcement Agencies What message does
it send to people?
A. There are two sides to that question.
The fact that he was arrested that in
itself sends a wrong message. When he
was in the watch house, the people
running the watch house did everything
within their powers to meet Haneef's
needs and that all his reasonable
requests were met. I did not feel that
there were any issues with his
treatment.
The same, however can not be said about
the way AFP and the former government
handled the case. His arrest and events
that followed can be viewed as a very
low moment in our history. We are a
country of Immigrants. I admit that from
time to time the authorities may get it
wrong but the way they did things in
Haneef's case, it was over the top. The
way some of the legislation operates and
the powers associated with it needs to b
looked at. For example, the whole
Immigration Act needs a review.
As a country of immigrants we should
show compassion to the way we deal with
refugees. Our policy on immigration
should be open to all and not to the
wealthy. Look at my background. I was
born in Townsville nearly 52 years ago.
My father Joe Russo an Italian migrant
and mother Maureen, of Irish heritage
were migrants. My father Joe was born in
Giarre in eastern Sicily and emigrated
as a boy to join his father Salvatore, a
cane cutter and cook in sugar cane camps
around Ingham. The family had no money.
It was the family's motivation for hard
work that got us to where we are today.
In many ways poor people are the
backbone of any economy. Wealth creates
job for poor.
Q. What made you accompany Haneef to
India? Was it your first trip?
A. It was certainly my first rip.
Mohammed Haneef wanted me to come with
him. The Australian Immigration was
comfortable that I was going. In case
there were problems at Bangkok
[Thailand] and at the Airport in India.
Everything went fine. There were
absolutely no problems.
Q. Tell us about your trip to India,
Indian immigration clearance and your
time with Haneef's family.
A. The reception was unbelievable. There
were hundreds, may be thousands of
people, wanting to get a glimpse of us.
There were people everywhere on roof
tops, embankments. You just couldn't see
anything. We were told that hundreds of
well-wishers and media persons had
gathered much before the arrival of the
flight to catch a glimpse of a man whose
detention without proof had grabbed
global headlines. Police helped us to go
through the crowd. At one stage there
was man who was trying to garland Haneef.
He was beaten up by Police. I think the
poor fellow fell on the ground, he
eventually managed to get up and garland
him.
I stayed at a Hotel in Bangalore and I
was very well looked after. Most of my
meals were with Haneef's family. They
simply wanted me to have lunch and
dinner with them. I was taken to few
temples and to places of cultural
significance. They took me to a Jungle
in Mysore. We stayed for three days at
one of the Bungalows owned by one of Dr.
Mohammed Haneef's relatives
The jungle life is exciting. I saw
elephants, deer and other animals but
missed out on seeing a tiger.
The place has wardens to protect the
wildlife from poachers. One morning I
was talking with a warden who mentioned
that he had shot a poacher the night
before. These wardens have, I suppose,
authority to shoot poarchers.
Q. Are you in touch with him and how
often do you speak to him?
A. It depends. Sometimes once a week .
For example I spoke with him this week.
I bring him up to date with the Clarke
Inquiry. There may be other matters that
need attention, yes we do speak.
Q. There is a view out there that if
and when Dr Haneef decides to come back
be could be subjected to some secret
surveillance. Who would want to live
such a life?
A. As you are aware I am involved with
Clarke inquiry. We have Mr. Rod Hodgson
of Maurice Blackburn Lawyers Maurice
acting for Dr. Haneef. This inquiry will
look at various issues.
Eventually, I hope he comes back. It
will take some time. He still has to
comply with visa requirements. He needs
a sponsorship and nomination.
Conclusion: Mr. Russo thanks for your
time. It was a pleasure talking with
you. |
