ASIO appeals over secret documents

Melbourne, 28 February 2008: ASIO's security assessments of deported US peace activist Scott Parkin and Iraqi refugees Mohammed Sagar and Muhammad Faisal could be based on information that the three men themselves were not aware of, the full bench of the Federal Court heard in Melbourne today.

Charles Gunst QC, appearing for ASIO chief Paul O'Sullivan, made the comments in response to suggestions from the bench that Parkin, Sagar and Faisal could establish a case for overturning the adverse assessments by submitting detailed life histories to the court.

Mr O'Sullivan is appealing a court order which would identify documents relating to ASIO's adverse assessments of Parkin, Sagar and Faisal. If upheld, the order for discovery will enable the three men's lawyers to apply for access to the documents.

ASIO's adverse security assessments could be based on "information that you yourself didn't know" or "associations the significance of which [you] may be unaware," Mr Gunst said.

Even revealing the number of documents ASIO held on the three men could jeopardise Australia's national security, he said.

Mr Parkin was deported from Australia and Mr Sagar and Mr Faisal faced indefinite detention on the island of Nauru after ASIO issued adverse security assessments of the three men in 2005.

ASIO conducted a second security assessment of Mr Faisal after his evacuation to a Brisbane hospital in late 2006 amid fears that he was at imminent risk of suicide.

The fact that ASIO's second security assessment cleared Mr Faisal for resettlement in Australia was evidence that "the system works", Mr Gunst said.

Julian Burnside QC, appearing for Parkin, Sagar and Faisal, told the court that the effective reversal of Mr Faisal's adverse assessment cast doubt on the lawfulness of ASIO's initial assessment.

All three men knew their own life histories and strongly denied that they had ever done anything to warrant being labelled a security threat, Mr Burnside said.

If the discovery order was overturned, they would be "flying blind" in their challenge to the assessments and would have no option but to relate their entire life histories to the court, he said.

Justices Ryan, North and Jessup reserved their decision.