Events Surrounding David Hicks - Case Study Example

Name Course Instructor Date Justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done Justice can be defined as that concept based on rationality, religion, fairness, ethics, equity and rationality taking into account the inborn as well as inaliaeble rights of all citizens and human beings1. Additionally, justice call for individual and people protection before law and their civil rights without any form of discrimination on the basis of national origin, gender, ethnicity and age. From this definition it is right to state that ‘justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.’ This thesis statement can well be elaborated using David Hicks as a case study. David Hicks is an Australian citizen that was captured by US military in Afghanistan and detained in Guantanamo Bay on the basis that he was combatant enemy. After three years of detention, David was charged with attempted murder, conspiracy and aiding the enemy. From this judgment, it is quite evident that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done. The issue of access to justice and law raises enduring questions about the concept of justice as well as the concept of justice2. There are various operational problems associated in justice that suggest that justice should not only be done but rather it should manifestly and undoubtedly be done. Justice systems are not working for the majority of the Australian citizens but rather the corruptions and political interference creates additional distortion in service delivery. To account for the thesis statement using David Hicks case, there are various breach of justice that need to be address so as to ascertain the phrase “justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”. Law council maintained that their lacked any legal foundation for the charges initially pursued against David, the case was marked with inherently and flawed rules of evidence and procedure of the US military commission3. Additionally, the compliance of the Australian government in David detention without any outlined trial and the assent of the Australian government in Hicks before a military commission. Although the events surrounding David Hicks have caused much misinformation, controversy and speculation based on the right to fair trial, cruel inhuman and degrading treatment, justice in David Hicks was not manifestly and undoubtedly seen to be done. Through justice, every person has a right to be protected from human right abuses and therefore the need to recognize that the 2006 military Act as “fatally flawed” and unfair4. Firstly, David case was not open to independent investigation given the constant allegation of constant political interference and torture. Justice which is headed by the judiciary arm is an independent body but political interference in David case indicated laxity in manifestation of justice. Justice requires that David Hicks investigation need to be open to Australian people who have the right to know what transpired. Lack of transparency in David Hicks case justice is being done but it is not manifested and undoubtedly been seen to be done. Transparency is a fundamental principle of any justice practicing and democratic government. Justice requires that no citizen should be at any given point be subjected to an unfair system which are largely unsupported by the rule of principle and law of fairness. Most important no individual need to be subjected to degrading and cruel treatment as well as torture5. Political interference is one of the key reasons why justice today is seen to be done but not manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done6. Howard government struck a deal with the Bush administration to remove the confinement without trail of Hicks as a political problem. Justice calls for openness in the trail proceeding with no favor or biasness to another party. Justice today is being used to favor the mighty and powerful and incriminating the poor who seemingly lack freedom o speech. In 2007, Hicks was banned to communicate to the media, sue the US government and withdraw his claim that he had been tortured during his incarnation. This clearly breaches the rule of fairness and just as well as freedom to communication. Based on the various contemporary theories of justice, justice is crucial and is considered to be the virtue of all social institution. Justice in David Hicks case was used to oppress him to a point of ensuring that he was not able to make profit from any kind of story he planned to tell the Australian public. International law maintain that prisoners are required to be transferred back to their home country for various humanitarian reason, the Australian justice system worked contrary to this notion. For Australian justice to manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done justice it was necessary for them to work like Britain where they insisted none of its peoples be prosecuted unfairly, and demanded that they should be immediately be returned home7. Justice within a nation is required to protect the citizens who are governed under the developed laws8. Through interviewing Hicks in a United States custody to gather significant intelligence, Australia participate in Hicks unlawfully treatment by the US justice system. Additionally, Australia support for Hick trial in US constitute to unlawful assistance for Hicks unfair trial. Evidently, Hick was abused while in US custody, but justice was not manifestly and undoubtedly seen to be done due to the fact that he failed to autonomously investigate probable allegations of suffering made by an Australian national, where the US had failed to explain his injuries. Article 7, Universal Declaration of Human Rights indicates that; “No person should at any given time be subjected to cruel, degrading treatment or inhuman treatment or even punishment. Most particular, no individual will be subjected without his free will to scientific experimentation or medical experimentation.” The recent drop of the proceedings of case against David Hicks clearly showed that the government preferred the case to be left in its past as opposed of pursuing justice for its citizen. Evidence submitted to court by Australian government ironically indicated that based on Hicks medical records that he was not mistreated on the other hand the medical record showed another side of Guantanamo medical care. This clearly shows that Australian government should practice justice to its entire citizen regardless of their race, religion and age. In David book Guantanamo: My Journey it suggest that; “My consent was not sought after nor had I any preference when it came to being enforced fed tablets, or the abundant injections that we were all given. Many blood tests were also taken time after time over the years I was apprehended.” David Hicks. For justice to be manifested and undoubtedly be seen to be done, governments must effectively consider their choice of action especially when their nationals are mistreated and detained abroad9. Evidently, Hicks case has underlined the need political diplomacy that permeates government verdict as to what steps need to be taken to shield their citizen abroad10. While Australian took various actions in regard to David Hicks case, their efforts were constantly hampered by Australia political relation with the United States especially on one regarding “war on terror”. This therefore indicates that political interference is one of the key influencing factors that limit most citizens of fair and just judicial systems. Work Cited David Hicks: charges outlined". Joint Media Release: Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs and Australian Attorney General. Commonwealth of Australia. 3 February 2007. Retrieved 29 May 2011 Duff, Eamon. "At last, Hicks answers the tough questions". The Sydney Morning Herald..Fairfax Media. 12 December 2010 Farser, Malcolm "Human rights education is a human right". Human Rights Education Conference, Faculty of Education & The University of Melbourne Human Rights Forum (The University of Melbourne. 16 February 2007. Horton, Scott. "The Plea Bargain of David Hicks". Harper's Magazine. 2 April 2007. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (revised edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 3 Konow, James. 2003. "Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories." Journal of Economic Literature 41, no. 4: page 1188 Martyn, Angus Research Note 33 2004–05 : Progress of the United States Military Commission trial of David Hicks. Parliament of Australia Library. 14 February 2005. Sworn charges: conspiracy; attempted murder by an unpriviledged belligerent; aiding the enemy" (PDF). Military Commissions: David M. Hicks. U.S. Department of Defense. 2004. Read More