This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/02/nauru-blocks-visa-of-australian-barrister-for-deportee-and-asylum-seekers

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Nauru blocks visa of Australian barrister for deportee and asylum seekers Nauru blocks visa of Australian barrister for deportee and asylum seekers
(35 minutes later)
The Nauruan government has blocked a visa application from an Australian barrister involved in a high-stakes case that could see the Nauruan president Baron Waqa and justice minister David Adeang face contempt of court charges.The Nauruan government has blocked a visa application from an Australian barrister involved in a high-stakes case that could see the Nauruan president Baron Waqa and justice minister David Adeang face contempt of court charges.
Australian barrister Jay Williams was seeking to appear in court to represent Rod Henshaw, an Australian who lived on Nauru and who was deported in controversial circumstances by the Nauruan government.Australian barrister Jay Williams was seeking to appear in court to represent Rod Henshaw, an Australian who lived on Nauru and who was deported in controversial circumstances by the Nauruan government.
He also represents more than 1,000 asylum seekers on the island in an ongoing legal case surrounding their detention in the Australian centre on the island.He also represents more than 1,000 asylum seekers on the island in an ongoing legal case surrounding their detention in the Australian centre on the island.
The Nauruan government is now seeking to strike out Henshaw’s claim as well as those on behalf of the asylum seekers who alleged their human rights are being violated in the detention centre.The Nauruan government is now seeking to strike out Henshaw’s claim as well as those on behalf of the asylum seekers who alleged their human rights are being violated in the detention centre.
In an email from the Nauru immigration office, Williams’s application for a business visa is refused with only the words “This is denied” provided to explain the decision.In an email from the Nauru immigration office, Williams’s application for a business visa is refused with only the words “This is denied” provided to explain the decision.
The visa refusal is now facing an appeal in the Nauruan district court, while the government is continuing with its own motion to strike out both major court cases.The visa refusal is now facing an appeal in the Nauruan district court, while the government is continuing with its own motion to strike out both major court cases.
The application for judicial review by Henshaw, obtained by Guardian Australia, said the decision to deny Williams’s visa is a breach of natural justice and procedural fairness, and names the secretary of justice, Lionel Aingimea, as the respondent.The application for judicial review by Henshaw, obtained by Guardian Australia, said the decision to deny Williams’s visa is a breach of natural justice and procedural fairness, and names the secretary of justice, Lionel Aingimea, as the respondent.
“There was no evidence or other material to justify the making of [the] decision to deny the legal representative of the plaintiff a visa,” it said.“There was no evidence or other material to justify the making of [the] decision to deny the legal representative of the plaintiff a visa,” it said.
It said Aingimea “exercised power for an improper purpose, to deny the plaintiff his constitutional and common law right to legal representation” and was an attempt to “pervert the course of justice”.It said Aingimea “exercised power for an improper purpose, to deny the plaintiff his constitutional and common law right to legal representation” and was an attempt to “pervert the course of justice”.
A series of other court documents also reveal that the Nauruan secretary of justice personally intervened to prevent Williams being admitted to the Nauruan supreme court.A series of other court documents also reveal that the Nauruan secretary of justice personally intervened to prevent Williams being admitted to the Nauruan supreme court.
Williams applied for admission as a barrister of the Nauruan supreme court on 10 October 2014. But two weeks later, on 28 October 2014, he was issued with a summons by the district court of Nauru, facing charges of accessing a restricted area dating back to events in January.Williams applied for admission as a barrister of the Nauruan supreme court on 10 October 2014. But two weeks later, on 28 October 2014, he was issued with a summons by the district court of Nauru, facing charges of accessing a restricted area dating back to events in January.
Aingimea’s objection came a day after Williams was charged with the offence. While on a previous visit to Nauru in February 2014, Williams had been a passenger in a car with a Salvation Army employee, Adam Savage, who dropped Williams off at the airport.Aingimea’s objection came a day after Williams was charged with the offence. While on a previous visit to Nauru in February 2014, Williams had been a passenger in a car with a Salvation Army employee, Adam Savage, who dropped Williams off at the airport.
On his way to the airport, Savage turned off onto the airstrip entrance – a restricted area – and performed a number of “donuts” on the airport runway. Savage said in a statement that Williams urged him not to take the action, and Williams was not charged at the time.On his way to the airport, Savage turned off onto the airstrip entrance – a restricted area – and performed a number of “donuts” on the airport runway. Savage said in a statement that Williams urged him not to take the action, and Williams was not charged at the time.
In a letter to the Nauru DPP, Williams’s counsel said the charges were “baseless” and a way to block the proceedings.In a letter to the Nauru DPP, Williams’s counsel said the charges were “baseless” and a way to block the proceedings.
“A baseless charge is brought against Mr Williams, in an attempt to block his admission and to further obstruct the Henshaw matter and the asylum seeker case,” the letter said.“A baseless charge is brought against Mr Williams, in an attempt to block his admission and to further obstruct the Henshaw matter and the asylum seeker case,” the letter said.
It continued: “If at any stage, the Office of Public Prosecutions has received undue interference or pressure from members of the executive, to prosecute the charge against Mr Williams, without foundation and without evidence, then the Office of Public Prosecutions has a duty to the court and to the administration of justice to vigorously resist such interference and pressure, no matter what the professional or personal cost may be and ventilate such interference and pressure with the court at the first opportunity.”It continued: “If at any stage, the Office of Public Prosecutions has received undue interference or pressure from members of the executive, to prosecute the charge against Mr Williams, without foundation and without evidence, then the Office of Public Prosecutions has a duty to the court and to the administration of justice to vigorously resist such interference and pressure, no matter what the professional or personal cost may be and ventilate such interference and pressure with the court at the first opportunity.”
The charges were later dropped by the DPP and Williams succeeded in being admitted. But in May 2015 his business visa was denied without reason, despite the imminent proceedings. A legal challenge to the visa decision is now underway. The charges were later dropped by the DPP and Williams succeeded in being admitted. But in May 2015 his business visa was denied without reason, despite the imminent proceedings. A legal challenge to the visa decision is now under way.
The maze of dynamic legal proceedings on the island have emerged as part of an ongoing dispute that first began when Henshaw - a former resident of Nauru - received a deportation order from the government. The maze of dynamic legal proceedings on the island have emerged as part of an ongoing dispute that first began when Henshaw – a former resident of Nauru – received a deportation order from the government.
His deportation was temporarily halted by former magistrate Peter Law. But Law himself was then deported from the country and prevented from re-entering, in the first of a series of blows to the integrity of the judiciary on the island nation.His deportation was temporarily halted by former magistrate Peter Law. But Law himself was then deported from the country and prevented from re-entering, in the first of a series of blows to the integrity of the judiciary on the island nation.
Henshaw, whose wife died on the island in 2013, said the long-running case was a serious denial of natural justice, and had placed immense pressure on him. Henshaw, whose wife died on the island in 2013, said the long-running case was a serious denial of natural justice and had placed immense pressure on him.
“Psychologically it’s just devastated me, quite frankly. Whatever way this case goes, I would have liked this to have been over, quite frankly, a lot sooner.”“Psychologically it’s just devastated me, quite frankly. Whatever way this case goes, I would have liked this to have been over, quite frankly, a lot sooner.”
“Not being able to get back to the island to visit my wife’s grave has been difficult enough, but being bashed around the head with these proceedings has been incredible hard.” “Not being able to get back to the island to visit my wife’s grave has been difficult enough, but being bashed around the head with these proceedings has been incredible hard.
“There are serious consequences here for these proceedings. You’ve got to wonder how the Australian government and the New Zealand government feel about these kind of decisions.”“There are serious consequences here for these proceedings. You’ve got to wonder how the Australian government and the New Zealand government feel about these kind of decisions.”
Henshaw and Law’s deportation was followed by the resignation of former chief justice Geoffrey Eames as well as the solicitor general Stephen Bliim. Henshaw and Law’s deportation was followed by the resignation of the former chief justice, Geoffrey Eames, as well as the solicitor general Stephen Bliim.
While his legal case is a civil claim relating to seeking damages, his claim was later amended to include the contempt of court charges against the Nauruan president, Baron Waqa and the justice minister, David Adeang, following the deportations.While his legal case is a civil claim relating to seeking damages, his claim was later amended to include the contempt of court charges against the Nauruan president, Baron Waqa and the justice minister, David Adeang, following the deportations.
Further concerns continue to be raised about Nauru, with the blocking of several websites including Facebook and the recent deportation of the general manager of telecommunications provider Digicell.Further concerns continue to be raised about Nauru, with the blocking of several websites including Facebook and the recent deportation of the general manager of telecommunications provider Digicell.
The Nauruan government and Adeang have not responded to requests for comment.The Nauruan government and Adeang have not responded to requests for comment.