2003

Faheem Lodhi — Sydney Electricity Grid Plot

Share this

Introduction

In early October 2003, a customer calling himself M Rasul, of a company called Rasul Electrical, ordered a desk map and a wall map of the Australian electricity supply system from a Sydney supplier. He gave a post office box, a phone number and a business name.

None of it was real. The man was actually Faheem Khalid Lodhi, a Pakistan-born Sydney architect and Australian citizen who was also known as Abu Hamza.

The Frenchman

Five months earlier, in May 2003, a French national named Willie Brigitte had landed in Sydney. The court in Lodhi's trial was told that Lodhi helped arrange his accommodation, that the two men had trained in Pakistan with Lashkar-e-Taiba (a group Australia has banned as a terrorist organisation), and that they kept in contact using mobile phones registered under false names.

In October 2003, Brigitte was deported to France for breaching his tourist visa. He was not charged in Australia. In 2007 a Paris court convicted him of criminal association in relation to a terrorist enterprise, and he was sentenced to nine years.

What police found

Lodhi was charged on 22 April 2004 and refused bail. The prosecution's case rested on four things: the electricity grid maps; his enquiries about the price and availability of chemicals capable of making explosives; a notebook, handwritten by Lodhi in Urdu, containing instructions for making poisons, explosives and incendiary devices; and aerial photographs of three Sydney defence sites, namely Victoria Barracks, HMAS Penguin and Holsworthy Barracks.

Lodhi pleaded not guilty. He told the court the chemicals were for a business venture and the maps were for a plan to market generators in Pakistan. "This country is my country and these people are my people," he said in his own defence.

Government Response

A law nobody had used

Lodhi was prosecuted under the terrorism offences Parliament added to the Commonwealth Criminal Code after September 11, which had never been tested at trial. Under those offences, the prosecution did not have to prove a time, place or method of attack, only that he had prepared for one.

The law changed during the case

Lodhi's lawyers attacked the indictment because it did not identify any specific terrorist act. While his case was before the courts, Parliament changed the law.

In November 2005, the Howard government passed the Anti-Terrorism Act (No 1) through Parliament in a matter of days, citing the threat uncovered by Operation Pendennis. The Act changed the wording of the preparation offences from "the" terrorist act to "a" terrorist act, which meant prosecutors would never again need to identify a specific attack. A further amendment made the change retrospective.

The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal refused to apply it to Lodhi, ruling that retrospective amendments could not reach into a trial that had already begun. It found the original indictment lacked particularity, and sent the matter back to be charged again. The prosecution redrew the charges and the case went ahead.

Secret evidence

Lodhi's was also one of the first trials run under the National Security Information Act 2004, which lets the Attorney-General restrict how national security material is disclosed in court. Lodhi challenged the Act as unconstitutional, and lost.

The verdict and the sentence

The trial began on 26 April 2006, two years after his arrest. The jury deliberated for almost five days. On 19 June 2006 it found him guilty on three counts: collecting the maps, seeking the chemical information, and possessing the notebook. It acquitted him on the fourth count, which concerned the aerial photographs of defence sites.

On 23 August 2006, Justice Anthony Whealy sentenced him to 20 years with a 15-year non-parole period, the heaviest terrorism sentence in Australia at the time. The judge also found the plan was at an early stage: no bomber had been chosen, and neither the precise target nor the method had been worked out.

The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the conviction and sentence in December 2007. It noted his acts "did not give rise to any imminent, let alone actual, threat" of injury or damage, but held that early-stage preparation could still carry high culpability. The High Court refused him leave to appeal in June 2008.

Parole

Because Lodhi is a federal offender, his parole is decided not by a parole board but by the federal Attorney-General. His non-parole period expired in 2019. Attorney-General Christian Porter refused parole in 2019 and again in April 2020.

By then, Lodhi's lawyers told the Federal Court, he had admitted his guilt, disavowed his extremist ideology and been reclassified as a minimum-security prisoner. Justice Robert Bromwich dismissed his challenge, finding no legal unreasonableness in the Attorney-General's decision, while acknowledging Lodhi's side had made "compelling arguments in favour of a contrary conclusion."

Summary

Faheem Lodhi was the first person convicted of preparing a terrorist act under Australia's post-9/11 laws. He was found guilty over two maps, a notebook and a series of chemical enquiries, and cleared over the defence sites.

His case was the first test of those laws. While it was under way, Parliament changed them, citing Operation Pendennis, so that prosecutors no longer had to identify a specific attack.

Willie Brigitte, who the court was told had trained with him, was deported and not charged in Australia. Lodhi served his minimum term. The federal Attorney-General then refused him parole, in 2019 and again in 2020.

You be the judge.

Similar Cases

Sydney (Hyde Park) protest riot
Holsworthy Barracks Plot (Operation Neath)

Leave a comment