 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Legal update: Parkin v O'Sullivan
LATEST NEWS
Federal Court upholds peace activist's right to ASIO files
Melbourne, 18 July, 2008: Deported US peace activist Scott Parkin has welcomed a Federal Court judgement upholding his right to access a list of documents showing why Australia's domestic spy agency regards him as a threat to Australia's national security.
The full court judgement opens the way for Mr Parkin's lawyers to apply for access to his adverse security assessment and other ASIO documents relating to the case, including a secret 1990 "determination" showing the criteria ASIO used to deem him a security threat. More >
CASE CHRONOLOGY
Scott Parkin's court battle began after former Attorney General Philip Ruddock refused to explain ASIO's actions
December 2005
Scott Parkin launches Federal Court action against ASIO's Director-General of Security, Paul O'Sullivan, asking the court to quash the adverse security assessment.
April 2006
Parkin's lawyers seek a "discovery order" to determine which documents held by ASIO are relevant to the case. Mohammed Sagar and Muhammed Faisal, two Iraqi refugees facing indefinite detention on the island of Nauru after receiving adverse assessments, join the court action.
Counsel for O'Sullivan opposes discovery, arguing that because Parkin, Sagar and Faisal don't know why ASIO considered them threats, they have no case and therefore don't need to know why the adverse assessments were issued.
November 2006
Justice Sundberg describes O'Sullivan's argument as "circular" and orders the parties to confer on orders for discovery, with the aim of reaching agreement on which documents should be included.
O'Sullivan is granted leave to appeal to the full court after arguing that merely revealing the existence of documents relevant to the case would cause "irreparable harm" to Australia's national security.
May 2007
The Full Court revokes O'Sullivan's leave to appeal, on the basis that Justice Sundberg had not actually issued a discovery order, but had simply ordered the parties to confer on the terms of an order.
September 2007
O'Sullivan agrees that the adverse security assessments and a number of other documents are discoverable, but opposes the inclusion of:
- ASIO's recommendations to the Immigration Department that Parkin's visa be cancelled and Sagar and Faisal's visa's refused
- Records of ASIO's interviews with Sagar and Faisal
- A classified 1990 "determination" showing the criteria ASIO applies when assessing security threats under the the category of "politically motivated violence"
November 2007
Justice Sundberg orders discovery of the disputed documents, including the 1990 "determination":
The respondent [O'Sullivan] correctly says that the applicants do not plead that the criteria in the document were misapplied by him. However, without knowing what the criteria are, they could hardly do this. In my view the document is discoverable.
December 2007
O'Sullivan is granted leave to appeal to the full court for a second time.
February 2008
The full bench of the Federal Court hears O'Sullivan's appeal of Justice Sundberg's discovery order. Counsel for O'Sullivan tells the court that even revealing the number of relevant documents held by ASIO could jeopardise Australia's national security.
July 2008
Justices Ryan, North and Jessup dismiss O'Sullivan's appeal of the discovery order with costs.
