[Kumaraswamy ] reiterated his government’s readiness to help Haneef in whatever way possible in the state assembly Tuesday in response to opposition Congress demand that the state bear the doctor’s legal expenses.

Before Kumaraswamy extended support to him, the city police had said they intended to question him notwithstanding the fact that the Australian police had dropped the charges.

The chief minister’s action has ‘certainly placed the police in a difficult situation’, a senior city police official said.

Was Dr. Haneef an Indian mole on a spy mission in the UK and Australia? Why should the tax-payers foot an ordinary India citizen’s legal expenses in the host country, where he was on strictly private business? If a Bangalorean student in the US were accused of rape, and later acquitted for lack of evidence, would Mr. Kumaraswamy agree to foot his legal bills?

When Dr. Haneef has not been cleared by the Bangalore police, how could the Chief Minister endorse him for a government job, that too in a hospital? Not only that this Haneef episode is rapidly assuming ridiculous proportions, but such political interference in highly sensitive intelligence matters puts the national security in jeopardy also.

Your point on objective facts taken. I was quoting the newspaper report. I just quoted a few lines from it, the full article has more details. Somehow, I wouldnt trust someone keeping a diskfull of jehadi material, but thats for later.

The sadder conclusion is that if Sanjay Dutt were involved in the blasts but had not possessed firearms illegally, he would be roaming scot-free.

Vivek,

The magnitude, the hype… Insult to Haneef (possibly terrorist) seems like a bigger issue than insult to Arun Jain (who obviously did not intentionally delay software delivery). Somehow it just doesnt seem right. Its not just about haneef guilty or not, its the whole tamasha of secularism that is going on..

A certain Mr Jain of Polaris software India was arrested in Malaysia few years ago because his company delayed delivery of software to a client (and such things are generally covered in the contract, there is a fine deducted). It did not cause such ripples in the media , govt circles or anywhere, except in IT chat rooms..

A reminder, if any was needed, that public memory is hopelessly short-term.

This was covered extensively in the media.

Also, it was quite a diplomatic crisis.

Australian prosecutors knew all that and yet decided they had nothing to charge him with. Whatever you decide to conclude from media reports of partially released information, the objective fact is that the government of Australia decided that it did not have enough to charge him with anything. Objective fact is also that British authorities are holding Sabeel and Kafeel on terrorism charges. It’s good practice to believe in objective facts.

You’ve got to check your facts again on Sanjay Dutt. He was charged with possession of illegal weapons under the arms act, not for carrying out the Bombay blasts. There’s no fine line there. It’s clear. He’s been punished for his crime.

My point was about why the undue media coverage to Haneef.. and even being covered on this blog !! Maybe I did not put it so correctly, I admit I did mix up .. you may delete that comment.

Anyway,

Times of India today carries an article that says that Australia still suspects Haneef, but let him go because maybe they do not have “clinching” evidence.. Maybe they let him go to avoid diplomatic repurcussions.. and thats enough, they would take it as an insult (rightly so) if forced to apologize to haneef. They must have been led to think that its an issue in India, going by Indian media reports, and so they released him. (link)

from the article –

” some of the police evidence against Mohammed Haneef that persuaded him to revoke the 27-year-old doctor’s work visa. ”

and

“Citing police evidence, Andrews said that on the day Haneef attempted to leave Australia, he was told by one of his brothers in India in an Internet chat room: “Nothing has been found out about you.”
The brother, whose name was not immediately available, told Haneef to leave Australia that day, Andrews said. ”

Highly suspicious, isnt it?

Also jehadi material has been found on his computer.

Haneef knew about the terror plot, though he did not commit the crime himself. So does that count as involvement?

A very similar case is Sanjay Dutt, except that Sanjay has been sent to jail. He did not commit the 1993 bombay blasts, but he still was convicted. Well, there must be evidence against Sanjay. How fine is the line dividing involvement and non-involvement.. that is up to the law and prosecution’s case, but still…

A certain Mr Jain of Polaris software India was arrested in Malaysia few years ago because his company delayed delivery of software to a client (and such things are generally covered in the contract, there is a fine deducted). It did not cause such ripples in the media , govt circles or anywhere, except in IT chat rooms..

There’s no doubt that Australia is an important country insofar as supply of fuel is concerned. But that does not automatically mean that it needs to be ‘popular’, whereby there is strong public support for building deeper relations. Our current suppliers of fossil fuels are a case in point.

And the fuel supply relationship is important to Australia too, and they are coming around to realising it.

This is a far more important development for the Indo-Australian relations, than an apology from the Aussie government. Also, my recollection is that the AFP Inspector/Official, involved in the Haneef case has already tendered an apology to him [I think it was during a press conference after all the charges were withdrawn]. For the Indian government to get involved any further in this matter risks a blowback, in similar situations that the GOI may find itself embroiled.

These are dangerous times for democratic states around the world. Evidence in matters such as this difficult to garner, and the process by its very nature is prone to errors and mishandling. Full disclosure of information that may appear to be in the public interest, may not serve the interest of the public (domestic and foreign if the information were made public too soon, as an earlier post in this blog, “The secrecy around the 123 agreement”, has suggested. Speculation about conspiracy, racism, etc., is just that; in the end, it may be nothing more than a stupid blunder on the part of a field office.

Btw, there were media reports, both in India and Australia, of Haneef’s involvement with SIMI. Has there been any further development in this story or did it also turn out to be a red herring?

Looks like Australia knows which card to play (if at all, she is worried about her image in India).

I agree Australian govt needs to apologize to Haneef. But I can’t see this happening because this whole farce was in part because of the impending elections there. As for India-Aus relations, I don’t think there is much love already, in view of Australia’s unfavorable position on Uranium.

In my view, the Australian government owes an apology (and much else) only if they have doctored evidence; allegations which are later proven to be false simply don’t fall in the same category. And I don’t think in this case the Australian authorities have doctored evidence. Even in the case of his diaries, Haneef later admitted that he had made those entries.

Realism dictates that Australian government should apologize for better Indian-Austrlian relations especially since Indians make every thing an issue of national pride, but they are certainly not obliged too.