It may be reasonable for the Australian government to apologise to David Hicks and provide for his medical treatment, an expert says.
Professor Greg Barton of the Global Terrorism Research Centre believes Prime Minister Tony Abbott and former prime minister John Howard have used excessively strong language in saying Mr Hicks is not owed an apology.
Prof Barton said Mr Hicks was not without fault but the treatment he endured for five-and-a-half years in Guantanamo Bay and the way the legal case against him was carried out were wrong.
"I can understand them making the case that he was a foolish young man who has to give an account for his actions, and he did some foolish things," the Monash University professor told AAP.
"It does seem clear this government will not give an apology. That's not to say a future government won't."
Mr Hicks says he doesn't care about an apology and isn't surprised one won't be forthcoming, after a US military appeals court vacated his 2007 guilty plea to providing material support to terrorism.
He also says he's not seeking compensation at this point, but he does think the Australian government should cover his medical expenses for injuries linked to his detention in Guantanamo Bay.
Prof Barton said there may be some middle ground as it was widely recognised that the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, particularly those like Mr Hicks where there was no clear charge, was wrong.
"I think the fact that led to a deterioration in his physical and mental health means that there could be some provision given to his ongoing treatment, that wouldn't be an acknowledgment of any other obligation from the government.
"I think there's grounds for a reasonable and a humanitarian response."
Mr Howard, who was prime minister when Mr Hicks was sent to the US military prison in Cuba in 2002, says the 39-year-old is not owed an apology by any Australian government.
ANU professor of international law Don Rothwell said Mr Hicks was detained by the Americans, originally in Afghanistan and then at Guantanamo Bay, and then subject to the US military commission process under US law.
"It's always open to any citizen to seek legal redress but the fundamental point here is that the Australian government was not directly - I emphasise directly - involved in any of these matters.
"Ultimately of course it was the United States government which detained Hicks and it was under a process of US law under which he was ultimately convicted."
Prof Barton said while the first responsibility lay with the US government, there were questions about the Australian government's role and what it could have done to speed up justice and secure an earlier release for Mr Hicks.
Share
