Dale Mills
On June 1, former taxi driver and factory worker Jack Roche became the first person in Australia to be imprisoned as a "terrorist", after pleading guilty to involvement in an al Qaeda plot to bomb the Israeli embassy in Canberra. However, all the available evidence shows that he had actually sought to help the Australian Federal Police (AFP) stop any such terrorist act being committed.
During his 10-day trial in the Perth District Court, the British-born Roche recounted how his conversion to Islam shortly after his 40th birthday in 1993 had helped him cure his severe drinking problem. He then spent a few years in Indonesia learning about Islam and teaching English as a second language.
In late 1997, Roche joined a group called Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) when, he claims it was "still in its infancy" in Australia and had no connection with Saudi Arabian millionaire Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terrorist network.
In early 2000, Roche flew to Pakistan to join Afghanistan's ruling Taliban's war against the rival Northern Alliance warlords. But once there, he was approached by al Qaeda leaders, including a man introduced to him as Abu Hafs, who may have been Abu Hafs al Masri, alias Mohammad Atef, one of bin Laden's top lieutenants.
Roche said that the al Qaeda leaders he met gave him orders which he felt he had to obey or they would have had him killed. He was given 10-14 days military training, which he described as "very similar to basic training in the Army you know — how to use a rifle, how to use weapons, this kind of thing". The training included learning how to blow up 27 wooden crates — a test he passed.
Roche was ordered to conduct surveillance on Israeli targets in Australia, and to recruit others in Australia to form a "cell". He says there were no discussions about bombings.
When Roche arrived back in Australia in April 2000, he found out through an internet search that some of the people who had given him orders in Afghanistan were on the FBI's most wanted list.
"I was shocked", Roche said. While fearing that he would be killed if he pulled out of JI, he travelled to Indonesia for money to fund a surveillance operation on the Israeli embassy in Canberra.
In a taped interview with a British Sunday Times reporter, Roche said he thought that at the time he was being followed by JI. Later, at his trial, he was asked, "[Are you] saying it was possible that they could be waiting to see if you were doing the surveillance?", to which he replied "Yes".
Consistent with his account of events, Roche seemed to have done everything possible to let people around him know that he was engaged in surveillance of the Israeli embassy.
On June 12, 2000, instead of quietly video-taping the Israeli embassy, he got his son, Jens, from whom he was somewhat alienated, to accompany him. He got an Ethiopian taxi driver friend to drive the car. He borrowed a video camera from a teacher at the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, Sheik Feiz Mohammed, rather than buying one.
While he was video-taping the Israeli embassy, Roche got out of the car, and was so conspicuous that an Australian Protective Services security guard, Jeffrey Harrison, walked up and had a conversation with him.
A month later, Roche told a man named Ibrahim Fraser that there were plans to bomb the Israeli embassy. After telling him about "25 times", according to Fraser's account, Fraser finally took Roche seriously and phoned the AFP. However, the AFP ignored Fraser's call.
On July 14, 2000, Roche telephoned the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) to advise it of the surveillance work he had been doing, as well as his trip to Afghanistan and the orders he received from al Qaeda. ASIO failed to return his call or set up a meeting. This was the first of a number of blunders by ASIO that Prime Minister John Howard has since referred to as "a significant shortcoming".
Later that month Roche travelled to Indonesia, where, he says, he was told by JI leader Abu Bakar Bashir to comply with any order he was given, "whatever it happens to be". Upon his return to Australia, Roche contacted ASIO on August 10, 2000. This was the fourth time he had tried to speak to ASIO officers, again unsuccessfully.
Had ASIO not ignored Roche's phone calls, Clive Williams, the director of terrorism studies at the Australian National University's Strategic and Defence Studies Centre of the ANU, said "it would have perhaps been possible for" ASIO and the AFP "to have gained a much better understanding of what JI was all about".
Speaking on ABC Radio National's PM program on May 28, Williams said that had ASIO and the AFP "known a bit more about JI and its linkages to al Qaeda and what it was planning to do, maybe we could have put a bit more pressure on the Indonesians to put more effort into monitoring JI, which in turn might have made it much more difficult for JI to conduct its operations".
On October 12, 2002, the Bali bombings occurred, killing 202 people, among them 88 Australians. Within days, Roche was interviewed by AFP officers. He gave them the full details of what he had been doing, his JI contacts in Indonesia and al Qaeda contacts in Afghanistan.
Later at his trial his defence lawyer, Hylton Quail, said that Roche provided the AFP with "information they didn't have — it was unique and valuable". Quail emphasised that the information Roche provided the AFP contributed to the arrests of suspected Bali bombing "mastermind" Riduan Isamuddin (alias Hambali) and Kuwaiti national Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (alias Mukhtar), the alleged "mastermind" of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States. This claim was denied by prosecutors.
During October 2002, ASIO and the AFP conducted a highly publicised raid on Roche's home. A month later, Roche gave his taped interview to the London Sunday Times, fearing that he if he were detained by the AFP under Australia's terrorism laws, no-one would here his side of the story. He said that he believed he was being used as a scapegoat for the Bali bombing. He told the British paper: "I suppose that by the 'letter of the law' they will be capable of finding me guilty."
On November 18, 2002, Roche was charged with conspiring with others to bomb the Israeli embassy. While in prison awaiting trial, he wrote that "my arrest in November 2002 was merely an elaborate show for the benefit of the Australian public at large".
Roche believed that there was tremendous pressure on ASIO to find someone to convict for terrorism as it had let one of the alleged JI terrorists, Abdul Rahim Ayub, leave Australia without being detained at the time of the Bali bombings.
After Roche changed his plea to guilty on May 28, his Indonesian wife, Afifah, told reporters she believed he had done so only because of the stress of the trial. "He depressed because the questioning is around, around ... back again", she said.
She said he had told her earlier: "I can't speak to the prosecutor any more. I don't want to talk another word."
In response to the change of plea, AFP officer Michael Duthie said that it was Roche's own interview with the AFP which provided the evidence which led to his conviction. By taking part in the interview, he put "a noose around his own neck".
The government prosecutor called on Judge Paul Healy to give "Australia's first convicted terrorist" the maximum sentence of 25 years, saying that Roche's punishment had to be "dramatic". However, the judge sentenced Roche to 9 years imprisonment, with parole possible in four-and-a-half years. Since Roche has already been held in custody for 18 months, he could be released in three years.
The sentence has lead to fierce denunciation by the corporate press. "Soft on terror" screamed the Fairfax-owned Melbourne Herald Sun. The Murdoch press was equally infuriated, with the June 2 Australian claiming Healy had failed "to get with the [anti-terrorism] program". That day's Sydney Daily Telegraph carried the front page headline: "What a joke — free in three yeas".
Federal attorney-general Philip Ruddock announced that he had instructed the federal Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to consider appealing against the sentence for being "too lenient".
The next day, however, Ruddock admitted under questioning in federal parliament that the federal DPP had sent a letter to Justice Healy acknowledging Roche had cooperated with the AFP and therefore deserved a more lenient sentence than the 25-year maximum the prosecutor would ask for in open court.
From 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, June 9, 2004.
Visit the