JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, what's happened in relation to David Hicks?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, what's happened is that it's been agreed, it's been agreed with the Americans that the military commission process for the time being will be put on hold. Two senior officials from the Attorney General's Department, namely the Secretary Mr Robert Cornall and the relevant branch head, left Australia this morning to go to Washington to conduct discussions with the Americans. It's likely, if necessary, that Chris Ellison, the Justice Minister, who in our system is the equivalent of the British Attorney General, will join the discussions at the concluding stages. And we'll be having discussions with the Americans about ensuring that if these people are tried in the United States, the process will be as transparent as possible and as compatible with the notions of justice and fair dealing that we regard as meeting those requirements in Australia.
JOURNALIST:
Do you expect the military trials to proceed after these negotiations?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, the process is yet to be finalised and I don't want to pre-empt the discussion. One of the things you've got to bear in mind is that it's quite conceivable in these situations that somebody may have committed an offence under American law and not committed an offence under Australian law. And it could well be that if Mr Hicks, for example, were to come back to Australia, it may not be a prosecutable offence, yet if he's retained in the United States there is an offence.
JOURNALIST:
So he's not likely to be repatriated?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well clearly, if a judgement were made by the United States that the differences were, as I described, the answer to that would be no. But the whole purpose of the discussion is to ensure that there is a fair and transparent procedure. Could I just take the opportunity of saying there appears to be a notion around in some sections of the Australian community that an Australian apprehended abroad is entitled to some kind of automatic repatriation to Australia for trial, that is not right. If an Australian is charged with an offence in another country it is normal that he's tried either in that country or… not automatically repatriated to Australia. And this idea that we have an automatic entitlement and the British have an automatic entitlement to secure the repatriation of David Hicks, or indeed anybody else to Australia, is wrong - we don't.
JOURNALIST:
Will the delegation be seeking to ensure that Hicks and the other Australian that is being held will get full legal representation?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well certainly full legal representation. The question of the nationality of the defence lawyers and so forth, I'm not going to speculate about that. But we would certainly want to negotiate with the United States if there is to be a military commission procedure; we would want to negotiate arrangements and understandings that are as compatible with our notion of how these things should be done as is possible. And consistent with the fact that they were taken into custody, I think originally by the Northern Alliance, and in an operation that obviously involved the Americans, it did not involve the Australians. And bearing in mind that I don't think there's any argument that the person in question went to Afghanistan of his own free will.
JOURNALIST:
The British development and acknowledgment that Mr Habib and Mr Hicks have so far not received fair treatment.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, I don't think it's that. I think it's an acknowledgment that the Americans will always listen very closely to views that we want to express, as indeed they will listen very closely to the views that the British want to express. There have been discussions going on for some time and a few days ago, Mr Downer had a lengthy discussion with the American Secretary of State, Colin Powell, regarding this matter. So, it has been under discussion between Australia and the United States now for some days. But we are in the business of seeing that a proper arrangement is made consistent with the fact that the person in question was not taken into custody in Australia; he was not taken into custody by Australian forces; and that any notion that there is an automatic right of repatriation to Australia for trial is false.
JOURNALIST:
The British Prime Minister has asked for the British nationals to be repatriated. Have you done the same…?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not… on what do you base that claim by the British Prime Minister?
JOURNALIST:
Well the reports in Washington.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm not… I mean, I have not been so advised. I have not been so advised. What I have been advised is that discussions are under way between the Americans and the British and precisely what form of request from the British is a matter you'll have to take up with the British.
JOURNALIST:
How important is this contract to Australia in relation to posco, how important is this contract to Australia? And can you enlighten us on the gas meeting?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, what you are looking at here is the operation of Australia's largest commercial customer anywhere in the world, and you are looking at an operation that is employment, is jobs, is income, is wealth generation to the entire Australian community. And this is the most vivid example you can find of the interlocking goals and future of the Australian economy and the economies of North Asia. And it's a reminder of how the solid is the relationship, but it's also a reminder of the need for that relationship to be nurtured at a political level by visits such as mine. Because you're talking here about Australian jobs and Australia's economic future and Australia's future trade surpluses and balances.
JOURNALIST:
What response did you get from KOGAS representatives?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think KOGAS is very interested. They have a number of procedures to work out in relation to the competitive process. And obviously, we have to compete and we're not frightened of that, and then I took along the representatives of the companies and we presented a team Australia approach. We'll do what we can to help, as we did in China. We can offer long-term security of supply; they're the sort of things that we can offer.
JOURNALIST:
If there was a way of getting Mr Hicks back to Australia which satisfied the Americans, would you be happy to see that…?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I don't think it's a question of speculating at the present time. Look, I want an outcome which is compatible with the fair treatment of Mr Hicks, but also ensures that there is a proper ventilation and a proper ruler run over his behaviour. I think in the interests of natural justice as most broadly defined, I don't think people want a situation to arise where if an offence has been committed in another country against the laws of another country, then there should be some automatic entitlement that he should escape the consequences of that by virtue of his repatriation to Australia, where he may not have committed an offence against Australian law.
JOURNALIST:
You mentioned natural justice, do you agree with President Bush that the inmates of Guantanamo Bay are bad people?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look, I don't make a habit of sort of agreeing and disagreeing with every single statement that's made by President Bush. I'm quite sure that he probably had reasons for saying that. I'm clearly not in possession of all of the information that he is, and you've got to bear in mind that these people were never in our custody. And again can I make the point that just because somebody is an Australian, it doesn't mean that if they are apprehended in another country they have some kind of automatic entitlement to be both repatriated to Australia and tried under Australian law, that has never been the case. We would not extend that attitude to the nationals of another country. I think if Australians were confronted with the proposition that somebody who they believed had committed an offence of this country should go to another jurisdiction merely because that person was a national of that jurisdiction.
JOURNALIST:
You can still have a right to be innocent until proven guilty though.
PRIME MINISTER:
Oh yes, and one of the things that we will be asking for is that the presumption of innocence in any judicial procedure in the United States will apply. I have no doubt about that.
JOURNALIST:
What about the suggestion of the death penalty?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well our views on that are well-known and I'm quite sure that they will be taken into account in the discussions, and I'm quite sure in the final analysis they will be certainly be taken into account.
JOURNALIST:
What other things will you be asking for, Mr Howard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think at this stage I don't want to sort of read out the script - I know you'd like me to - but we'll… look, you have to understand that this arrangement having been entered in to, it's not being done just for appearances sake. There's going to be a very serious discussion between our people and the Americans, and they're obviously in the interests of sitting down and trying to reach agreement on an arrangement that is acceptable to us, but is also acceptable to them. And you've got to remember that they are dealing with people who they believe were intent on doing evil things to their people and to others, and they have a right to be heard on it as well, on that and they have a right to be involved in the procedure. But I think we've got to keep a sense of balance and perspective, but we'll be working hard to get a fair procedure so that in the end, natural justice as best we can define it universally is done and seen to be done.
Thank you.
[ends]