There have been mixed reactions to the sentence handed down to David Hicks in Guantanamo Bay.
Hicks was today sentenced to seven years jail, but will serve only nine months after the rest of the sentence was suspended.
He will serve his time in Australia under a plea deal and must arrive in Australia before May 29, 2007.
Bittersweet victory
Hicks' father said the news was a bittersweet victory and that he should have had a fair trial.
"It's a lot better than 12 years or seven or two or whatever they were touting throughout the night,'' Mr Hicks said.
"(But) it's a real shame David had to go through this way to get released when he should have had the the Australian government standing up for Australia's citizens' rights."
Mr Hicks said his son was forced to undergo a plea-bargain and his case was never properly tested in court.
"Nobody will ever know what the evidence was," he said.
PM's reaction
Prime Minister John Howard said Hicks pleaded guilty to assisting terrorists only because the US military had a strong case against him.
Mr Howard fired back at critics over the controversial military tribunal that tried Hicks, saying: "Whatever may be the rhetorical responses of some and particularly the government's critics, the facts speak for themselves."
"He pleaded guilty to knowingly assisting a terrorist organisation - namely al-Qaeda.
"He's not a hero in my eyes and he ought not to be a hero in the eyes of any people in the Australian community.
"The bottom line will always be that he pleaded guilty to knowingly assisting a terrorist organisation.
"He's acknowledged the prosecution could have proved that beyond a reasonable doubt."
Mr Howard also rejected claims that the Australian government influenced the tribunal to deliver a sentence for Hicks that would see him released after the federal election later this year.
Foreign Minister
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said paperwork was already being prepared to bring about the release of Hicks from Guantanamo Bay.
Mr Downer expected Hicks to return to Australia "much sooner" than the 60 day deadline set by a US military commission.
"It's appropriate, clearly, that he does serve a custodial sentence," he said.
"In David Hicks' case, he was involved in four terrorist organisations.
"He wasn't somebody who just happened to be backpacking through Afghanistan and unfortunately got tied up with al-Qaeda, he's somebody who quite deliberately went out there and became involved in these organisations."
Mr Downer said a plea bargain between Hicks' lawyers and the US military had been discussed for several weeks prior to the Australian's appearance before the military commission.
He also said it was uncertain if Hicks would be placed under a control order when released from jail.
Mr Downer rejected suggestions the sentence, which includes a 12-month gag order, was made for the convenience of the government in an election year.
He also welcomed Hicks' retraction of claims of abuse while in custody.
Labor reaction
Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd said a Labor government would honour the sentence imposed on Hicks and keep him in an Australian jail for his full nine-month term,.
Mr Rudd said the custodial process is controlled by legislation for prisoner transfers from the United States.
Both the government and the alternative government were bound by Australian law, in this case the International prisoners Transfer Agreement Act 1997.
"The stipulations within it are quite clear. It underpins the inter-governmental agreement which the Australian government has entered with the United States," he told reporters.
"As an alternative government our responsibility is to honour the law and that is what we propose to do."
'Not surprised': lawyer
The ex-lawyer of David Hicks says he is pleased but not surprised at the length of the sentence imposed on his former client.
Adelaide lawyer Stephen Kenny, who was sacked as Hicks' lawyer in February 2005 but remains a legal adviser to the Adelaide man's father, Terry Hicks, said he was pleased the sentence was short.
He said he understood why Hicks accepted the plea deal, given the length and conditions of his detention at Guantanamo Bay.
When asked if he thought the plea deal was a strategic move by Hicks, Mr Kenny said: ``Let's put it this way, if I was David in his position, I think I would personally have accepted such a deal to get out of Guantanamo Bay.''
The lawyer was scathing of the judicial process that led to Hicks' sentencing today, describing the military commission as "unacceptable" and lacking any independence.
"I think it will prove in the long-run to be an even greater embarrassment to the Americans if they persist with it," he said.
"Given that David's case has been rushed through following pressure from the Australian government, I wouldn't be surprised if no one else ever went through the system."
'Political farce'
Greens leader Bob Brown claimed the nine months sentence was a political farce.
"This is more about saving Mr Howard's political hide than about justice for Hicks," he said in a statement.
"It is clearly a political fix arranged between Mr Howard and the Bush administration to shut up Hicks until after the election in November.
"However the minute Hicks arrives in Australia, our legitimate justice system kicks into action. It may hold some nasty shocks for the Howard government which has endorsed this illegal process at Guantanamo Bay.''
Mr Howard rejected Senator's Brown's assertions, saying: "Of course he would say that.
"We didn't impose the sentence, the sentence was imposed by the military commission and the plea bargain was worked out between the military prosecution and Mr Hicks' lawyers," Mr Howard said.
"And the suggestion from Senator Brown, that it has something to do with the Australian elections, is absurd."
Mr Howard said he was pleased that Hicks had faced up to the "serious" charges laid against him.
"I held the view that these were serious charges and he ought to face those charges before the military commission and I am pleased that that has happened."
Deal criticised
The plea deal agreement has drawn criticism from civil liberties and human rights lawyers monitoring the trial.
They were especially critical of the order forbidding Hicks from protesting any mistreatment, saying such a requirement would be unconstitutional in a civilian US court.
"If the United States were not ashamed of its conduct, it wouldn't hide behind a gag order," said Ben Wizner, staff lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.
"The agreement says he wasn't mistreated. Why aren't we allowed to judge for ourselves?"
'Through hell'
Mr Hicks said his son had been "through hell" and should never have been made to endure the conditions at Guantanamo Bay.
"The Americans made David sign a paper to say he was never abused... when we knew he has been - David told us," he said.
Mr Hicks said he believed his son opted for a plea bargain to ensure his release, saying he would have been "crucified and nailed to the wall" if he pleaded not guilty.
"Military commissions aren't the way to go - they're set up to find people guilty and i think it's been proven particularly when the sitting judge can sack two of David's lawyers," he said.
"What I saw of that commission was that nothing had changed from the first time around - it's still the same."
Mr Hicks criticised the gag placed on David from speaking to the media for a year from his sentence.
"It's very strange that will fall during the election," he said.
"John Howard will probably be putting his head up saying `see, he's a terrorist.'"
Mr Hicks, who last spoke to David four days ago, said his son would just be looking forward to returning to Australia.
"All David would be thinking about at the moment is coming home," he said.
Mr Hicks said David would have to think about whether he would want to tell his story.
"Once David's home he'll have time to think about that," he said.
"Who knows, he may want to change his mind."
Hicks, 31, was captured in Afghanistan in December, 2001, after training with terror group al Qaeda and fighting with the Taliban against invading Coalition forces.
- with AAP, AP