So, effectively the AFP Chief is saying that the media shouldn't report on AFP activities in case it biases the outcome.http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/01/30/2149867.htm wrote: Keelty hits back over tough media scrutiny
By Michael Edwards
Posted 7 hours 22 minutes ago
Updated 7 hours 13 minutes ago
Last year, the AFP weathered a storm of criticism over its handling of the Dr Mohamed Haneef case.
Last year, the AFP weathered a storm of criticism over its handling of the Dr Mohamed Haneef case. (ABC News: Cate Grant)
* Audio: Keelty criticises 'uninformed' media (AM)
After taking sustained criticism for the Australian Federal Police's handling of the Mohamed Haneef saga, AFP Commissioner Mick Keelty has gone on the front foot to defend his organisation's handling of terrorism cases.
In a speech to the Sydney Institute last night, Mr Keelty took a swipe at media coverage of such cases, saying it is often uninformed and gives an incorrect perception that the AFP is failing in its duties.
But lawyers and journalists involved in the Mohamed Haneef case say Mr Keelty is simply shooting the messenger in what they say is a crude attempt to regain credibility for the AFP.
When Mr Keelty addressed the Sydney Institute last night, he had a few things he wanted to get off his chest.
"For most people, their sole source of knowledge regarding the AFP's counter terrorism investigations is in the mass media," he said.
"As such, it would be perfectly understandable if they mistakenly thought or held the belief that the AFP has failed the community."
Last year, Mr Keelty weathered a storm of criticism over the AFP's handling of the Dr Mohamed Haneef affair.
Dr Haneef was charged with supporting a terrorist organisation after his sim card was linked to the failed Glasgow airport bombings. The charges were eventually dropped, amid much media scrutiny.
Now Mr Keelty is calling for the media to change the way it covers counter terrorism operations. He says commentary should be delayed so the investigation and any subsequent legal proceedings can run their full course.
"I'm not saying that correct processes and procedures should be cast aside, nor should public institutions be immune from public accountability in the discharge of their public service," he said.
"But I am saying that a public discussion about them should be delayed in deference to judicial processes. Not subjugated, not quashed, not silenced, just delayed until the full gamut of judicial process has been exhausted.
"If charges are laid, the right of the alleged defender to the presumption of innocence should take precedence over the public interest in knowing how the investigation was conducted."
Mixed reactions
The Australian newspaper's Hedley Thomas won Australian journalism's highest award, the Gold Walkley, for his coverage of the Mohamed Haneef affair. He describes Mr Keelty's reasoning in the speech as strange.
"On the one hand he was saying that defendants and suspects deserve a much better go in the court of public opinion, as he described it, and that the media should treat them more kindly," he said.
"But the facts are that in the Mohamed Haneef case and others, it's been the police, the security agencies and the politicians using police information, that have smeared the character of the suspects before they have even been charged."
Dr Haneef's barrister, Stephen Keim, is equally perplexed with Mr Keelty's views about media coverage of AFP operations.
But there is support for the AFP Commissioner's point of view. Political commentator Gerard Henderson from the Sydney Institute says it is an issue that media outlets should take into consideration.
"What he was saying essentially was that editors and executive producers should exercise restraint when these matters are before the courts, and before they're before the courts," he said.
Normally I'd be supportive of such a measure (after all, do we need another ZOMG! THE MUSLIMS! scaremongering campaign from 7, 9 and 10?), but given the abhorrent behaviour of the AFP during the Haneef case and the accusations to do with their complicity in various other terrorism debacles I'd say that secrecy is the last thing they fucking need to have.
