One of Australia’s top barristers will seek to expand the legal definition of a political offence during a challenge to the extradition of Daniel Duggan, an Australian man accused of training Chinese military pilots overseas.
Duggan, 54, has been in custody since October last year after he was arrested at the request of the United States. An indictment in the US accuses him of training pilots when he was an instructor at a South African flight academy between 2010 and 2012.
Daniel Duggan was arrested at the request of the United States and has been in custody since October.
The father-of-six has denied the allegations, telling the ABC’s 7.30 in an interview from Lithgow correctional centre: “I strenuously reject the indictment in its entirety.”
“I went as an employee with other western pilots, including other Australians, and trained civilian Chinese test pilots,” Duggan said. “Now I’m in prison, and no one else is.”
Duggan was a highly-regarded pilot with the US Marine Corps before moving to Australia, where he renounced his US citizenship and became an Australian citizen.
On Tuesday, during a preliminary hearing at Downing Centre Local Court, barrister Bret Walker SC initially indicated he would apply for a temporary stay in Duggan’s case, however this did not eventuate and the case was adjourned.
The court heard Duggan’s legal team is awaiting the outcome of an inquiry into the case by the spy watchdog, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS).
Saffrine Duggan and one of her six children, Hazel, pictured in April.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
Walker said he was unable to detail precisely what IGIS was examining, aside from the fact it related to “circumstances subsequent to the alleged offending” and possible cooperation between security agencies in Australia and the United States.
“That fact is, in our submission, well within the orbit of material which may give a political character to the offence in question,” Walker said.
Extradition can be challenged on several grounds, including by arguing a person is being extradited to face a political offence. If this is proven, a person may be ineligible for surrender to the requesting country.
Walker said a political offence does not have a precise definition, with the Extradition Act defining it as an offence of a political character because of the circumstances in which it is committed, “or otherwise”.
He said no case law exists setting out the interpretation of those two words, “or otherwise”.
“This will be it,” Walker said. “There’s been no case of this kind argued or decided before.”
Magistrate Daniel Reiss said the lack of case law suggested the interpretation of the phrase was not as broad as Walker suggested.
“The rarity suggests it’s not a very broad definition,” Reiss said.
The magistrate adjourned the case to October, with the extradition hearing set down for November 24. Walker indicated there may be a further application for an adjournment.
Speaking outside court on Tuesday morning, Duggan’s wife Saffrine said he had been imprisoned for more than nine months “without any Australian charges, convictions, or history of violence – on the say-so of the United States government”.
“We are all determined to fight this terrible injustice,” she said.
“We’re saddened, we’re mortified, we’re horrified that something like this could happen – not only to us, but to anyone ... I would never have thought this could ever happen in Australia.”
The case will return to court on October 23.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.