Too cute by half.
One interesting thing in the Solicitor General's advice are the words:
"(his brother told him) ... not to let anyone else use his number in Australia or give it to anyone else"
What could be significant is that in the Solictor-General's advice these words were not quoted, indicating that they were a paraphrase of source material, rather than source material itself.
In some media this has been reported that he was advised he should not share his contact details. However, perhaps it is actually a paraphrase of advice not to give his phone or SIM to anyone.
Evidence in support of this interpretation is that it was not advice for Haneef to not use his own number. It was advice to not allow others to use it or possess it.
Sounds to me more like reasonable advice to give about a phone. Something along the lines of: "Haneef, you idiot, whatever you do this time, don't give your phone away!"
Yet, this is not how the paraphrase read. The paraphrase sounds like he is being warned to maintain radio silence, so to speak. But even the paraphrase doesn't actually say that. Yet, the public was invited to form a conclusion that something about his brother's advice in this case was suspicious.
This raises big questions about whether the Government is playing fast and loose with facts in its possession.
I am not claiming I know what the actual words were. I am claiming there is sufficient reason to doubt the Government's interpretation of the source material and this is very good reason for the Government to be more transparent in its presentation of so-called evidence.
I encourage everyone who reads this note and cares about the presumption of innocence and abuse of executive power to circulate this note to others of similar mind.
Let's see a little viral democracy in action.