Fighter pilot Daniel Duggan will fight charges all the way to US court, says lawyer

An Australian pilot accused of providing training to the Chinese military has ramped up his attack on Mark Dreyfus for engaging with the US in a ‘politically motivated’ case.

Daniel Duggan.

An Australian pilot accused of providing training to the Chinese military has ramped up his attack on Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus for engaging with the US in a “politically motivated” case and is demanding authorities release details of an investigation into services allegedly provided to foreign states.

Daniel Edmund Duggan, 54, was detained in October at the request of the US government after he was indicted for charges including conspiracy to unlawfully export defence services to China, conspiracy to launder money, and violating the arms export control act.

Mr Dreyfus waved through the US’s extradition request last month, clearing the way for a magistrate to determine whether the former fighter pilot is eligible for surrender.

Mr Duggan’s lawyer, Dennis Miralis, sought to adjourn the matter until next month at a hearing at the Sydney Downing Centre on Tuesday, accusing the US of prosecuting a politically motivated case.

“It seems to us that undoubtedly this indictment was brought during a time when the US administration was entering into a geopolitical contest with China, and was seeking to use the criminal law in furtherance of US foreign policy,” Mr Miralis told reporters outside court.

“This is not unusual in the way that the US criminal justice system operates. However, this is unusual in the way the Australian legal system operates.”

Asked about a second pilot, Keith Hartley, Mr Miralis said he was unable to talk about the case, but called on Australian authorities to release details of an investigation he believes has already been conducted.

“In order to understand what is happening with Mr Duggan’s case it is essential and a matter of public importance that the information is made available to the public about services provided to foreign states from 2009 to 2022,” he said. “We understand an investigation … has already taken place. It strikes us as being something that is materially relevant to the ultimate discretion by the Attorney-General if one Australian, who happened to have US citizenship at one point in time, should be singled out.”

Mr Miralis said extradition proceedings did not require the magistrate to determine “the strength or otherwise” of the allegations, and the court was typically only provided with a bare “skeleton”. “The test that is imposed under the extradition test is a very low-bar test.

“It is intended merely to provide to the magistrate … sufficient material which identifies that there is in fact a valid indictment and some information in support of that indictment in accordance with the treaty between the US and Australia.”

Mr Miralis confirmed his client was willing to fight the charges all the way to the US court.

“It should be remembered Mr Duggan should be presumed to be innocent under US law and under Australian law,” he said.

“Mr Duggan’s response to the allegations (is) he will defend against those allegations if needed to be in a court in the US.”

The matter will return to court on February 13.