QUEENSLAND Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce has questioned the motives of the latest Greens and Democrats motions on David Hicks, to be moved in the Senate this week.
"The sheer repetition of their motions is badging the issue as a Greens issue or Democrats issue rather than a process of justice issue," Senator Joyce said.
"The David Hicks issue is morphing from a legitimate discussion about the process of justice and now risks becoming a hobby horse for the Greens and the Democrats to gain votes rather than gain a fair trial."
Senator Joyce gave his reasons for why he plans to vote against the two foreshadowed Greens motions and why he may support the proposed Democrats motion.
"I will be voting against Senator Nettle's first foreshadowed motion because it calls on the US to release Mr Hicks. I believe David Hicks should be released if, after a fair trial, he is proven to be innocent or if the process of a fair trial cannot be secured. And if the motion was total, this would be clearly stated.
"In general it would appear that a fair trial is either not possible or able to be secured in a timely manner. However, the Government's efforts to get the trial to progress in a timely manner must be acknowledged. This is by reason of intense lobbying within Government from a range of quarters.
"Ms Nettle's second motion 'calls on the Australian Government to return Mr Hicks to Australia'. Our government cannot return Mr Hicks to Australia, only the US government can return Mr Hicks. To imply we have a power that we do not have is misleading.
"This is a clear indication of the Greens turning this in to a cause celebre for their upcoming election rather than a detailed, sincere effort to lobby support across parties for a fair trial.
"If the Greens were acting with good faith they would have the diligence to at least get the wording correct rather than just seeking effect by the repetition of placing a motion on the notice paper, even if technically incorrect. Surely Mr Hicks deserves better than that.
"I am prepared to support the motion of the Democrats if they amend it to delete three words – 'relevant ministers and' ".
"They know categorically that the inclusion of these words takes the motion from the possible to the gargantuan improbable and, if they are genuine about wanting to achieve a result, they will aim for what is attainable.
"I note that neither the Greens nor Labor have ever broken ranks from their own in the Senate to properly fulfil their roles as Senators representing their States.
"When you look at the track record of parties who always demand their members never abide by their constitutional role but only abide by the party directions then the argument that they place on the illegality of process in another country becomes implausible.
"Their own actions and the way they conduct themselves categorically proves they, too, find it convenient to not follow the integrity of the process when it suits them. They abscond from the proper constitutional process of their role whilst demanding the proper judicial process of someone else's.
"If the Democrats change their motion I will vote to support it. I will continue to work for the fair trial in a timely manner for an Australian citizen which will require, obviously, gaining further support throughout the Government. I state the obvious that The Greens' attempt to break the support camp which is currently building will serve no purpose but to keep Mr Hicks in jail longer. Surely this is not what the Australian people want.
"I will be voting against further Green and Democrat motions that I perceive to be an ad nauseam repetition of a position that I have, for a long time now, clearly stated."