Haneef 038; his country

In summoning the Australian high commissioner, the Indian government seems to imply that Mohammed Haneef, an Indian citizen being investigated by security agencies in Australia, is not being treated fairly. Human rights activists in Australia have criticised the immigration minister8217;s use of executive powers to override a court-ordered conditional bail for Haneef. Haneef8217;s lawyers have already said they will appeal. The issue seems to be the degree of innocence or otherwise in Haneef8217;s association with his cousins, Kafeel and Sabeel Ahmed, arrested for the attempted bombings in London and Glasgow. A section of Australia8217;s anti-terror law talks of individuals8217; reckless association with terrorist organisations. The immigration minister has suggested there is information on this aspect. Therefore, New Delhi could perhaps have waited to see what Canberra finally produced before registering a concern over due process.

Plus, let8217;s not be sanctimonious. What is due process when it comes to India? What is the record of our police and security agencies in terms of always respecting basic constitutional principles and guilty-until-proven-innocent rules? What is our record in quickly processing terror cases? Fourteen years after the Mumbai blasts, the convicted are still being sentenced. None of this is to suggest that India shouldn8217;t be concerned about its citizens abroad. But remembering how we run our own criminal justice system is useful when judging others: due process appears to have been followed in Haneef8217;s case. Even the minister8217;s exercise of his authority will be tested 8212; Haneef8217;s lawyers, courts of appeal and rights groups will want to determine whether he is a victim of state paranoia and/or profiling.

Meanwhile, can we respectfully draw the attention of those worried about Western jurisprudence that there are equally pressing matters at home? India under its present government seems to have made not netting terror suspects a policy. Whether Australia is proved to have been right or wrong in detaining Haneef, there is no mistaking the purposefulness in its efforts to go after a terror network. Pervez Musharraf, as these columns observed, had shown more purpose and guts over the Lal Masjid issue than many ruling party ministers had shown when dealing with another law and order menace in India: Naxalism. Under the UPA, it seems, political opponents and even journalists are more likely to receive the attention of sarkari snoops and wiretapping spooks than those who are a major threat to law and order. Of course, such facts would have been edited out of the MEA8217;s lecture to the Australian High Commissioner.