WAR ON JUSTICE

Hicks denied mental health assessment

An Australian forensic psychiatrist has been refused access to Guantanamo Bay inmate David Hicks to assess his mental health.
Professor Paul Mullen from the Victorian Institute for Forensic Mental Health visited Mr Hicks in February last year.
Last week the United States Defence Department cancelled a return visit.
Professor Mullen says there are significant questions that need to be answered about Mr Hicks's state of mind.
"Without independent mental health professionals coming in from outside, we have no idea what kind of state of mind this man is in and how close he is to suicide," he said.
"It's an outrageous situation from a mental health perspective."
Professor Mullen has told ABC Radio's AM Mr hicks needs an independent assessment of his mental health before he is brought to trial.
"Mr Hicks has made a number of statements and the state of mind that he might have been in when he made those statements are part of what the defence has to know," he said.
"There's also the issue of Mr Hicks's current state of mind - whether he is in a state to even be fit to stand trial should they bring him to trial."
Mr Hicks's military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, says he has been told that defence counsel can no longer conduct its own assessments at Guantanamo Bay.

[]

RULE OF LAW

The Enemy Within

“No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.”

This writ — or written order — has developed over the years as the principal check on arbitrary state power, the original human right, allowing a person who has been arrested to challenge the legality of that detention. It is called the “great writ,” habeas corpus, or “produce the body so that it may be examined.” Habeas corpus was codified by the British Parliament in 1640 and 1679 and is one of a handful of common laws explicitly referred to and protected in the American Constitution. Alexander Hamilton, the most zealous exponent of executive power among the founding fathers, noted that habeas corpus provided “perhaps greater securities to liberty and republicanism” than any clause of the Constitution.
But as of Oct. 17 of this year, this great writ has been substantially weakened in the United States by the assent of both the presidency and Congress.

NUCLEAR DAYS

China awards massive nuclear deal

Westinghouse, the nuclear-plant builder sold by British Nuclear Fuels earlier this year, has won a billion-dollar contract to build reactors in China.

The deal, worth about $8bn (£4.1bn), is for four nuclear plants. Analysts said that the deal may help soothe trade tensions with the US.
US-based Westinghouse defeated a number of other international companies to win the tender, including France's Areva and Russia's Atomstroiexport.
The fact that Westinghouse is now owned by Japan's Toshiba may also have helped secure the deal, especially after Japan's new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe signalled an intention to restore friendlier ties with China.
"This is all relationship driven," said David Hurd, an analyst at Deutsche Bank. "The US is putting pressure on China at the moment, so China's response is 'let's thrown them a bone,'" he explained.

SCALES OF JUSTICE

The Sunday Age newspaper campaigns to bring David Hicks home

He lives in a cell of featureless walls, 24-hour lighting and a single window of frosted glass that in daylight glows like a fluorescent globe.

For five years, David Hicks has occupied spaces like this, caught between a US Government that has been unable to prosecute him and an Australian Government that refuses to try to free him. This sentence without trial, in conditions so secret that he cannot be photographed, could drag on for another two years unless the Federal Government asks the United States to send him home.
Hicks' military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, says Australia is tolerating a terrible situation. While Hicks has been in legal limbo, John Walker Lindh — the so-called American Taliban who trained at the same camp as Hicks — has been charged, pleaded guilty and sentenced. But Lindh broke American law; Hicks has not broken Australian law.

Associate professor at Monash University's Global Terrorism Research Unit, David Wright-Neville, regards Hicks' treatment as outrageous in a human rights sense, and counterproductive from the perspective of counter-terrorism. He says the denial of justice and due process smacks of victimisation and threatens an entire community within Australia.
"David Hicks has been offered up as a sacrifi ce to the Bush administration," Wright-Neville says. "They had to let go of the Poms and the Swedes, so they want some token white guy so they can say we are prosecuting Europeans, not just Pakistanis and Saudis."

Law Council of Australia president Tim Bugg says the passage of time and the resulting loss of evidence means Hicks could not have a fair trial. "The Federal Government's inactivity and refusal to do anything is just extraordinary. There's an Australian citizen in the most appalling circumstances and the Government has done nothing to assist," he says.
Bugg says it appeared that political considerations rather than principle lay behind the Government's stance. "Because of that, the Government and the minister involved deserve to be condemned."

The Sunday Age invites readers to register their support to bring David Hicks home, and we will pass it on to the Federal Government. Send your messages to bringdavidhome@theage.com.au

BEAZLEY PUTSCH

Voters dump Beazley for Rudd: poll

SENSE AND PERCEPTION

'Beer goggles' effect explained

Scientists believe they have worked out a formula to calculate how "beer goggles" affect a drinker's vision.
The drink-fuelled phenomenon is said to transform supposedly "ugly" people into beauties - until the morning after.

Researchers at Manchester University say while beauty is in the eye of the beer-holder, the amount of alcohol consumed is not the only factor.
Additional factors include the level of light in the pub or club, the drinker's own eyesight and the room's smokiness.
The distance between two people is also a factor. They all add up to make the aesthetically-challenged more attractive, according to the formula.

KEY TO FORMULA
Beer goggles equation
An = number of units of alcohol consumed
S = smokiness of the room (graded from 0-10, where 0 clear air; 10 extremely smoky)
L = luminance of 'person of interest' (candelas per square metre; typically 1 pitch black; 150 as seen in normal room lighting)
Vo = Snellen visual acuity (6/6 normal; 6/12 just meets driving standard)
d = distance from 'person of interest' (metres; 0.5 to 3 metres)