Aust Appeals Court holds firm on terror guilt

The first person jaiiled for plotting a terrorist attack under Australia's new terror laws has lost an appeal against both his conviction and sentence.

Faheem Khalid Lodhi, 37, was last year convicted by a New South Wales Supreme Court jury of seeking prices for chemicals and possessing maps and bomb-making instructions in preparation for an attack on the national electricity grid.

The Pakistani-born architect was jailed for 20 years on three terrorism-related charges, one of which carried a maximum term of life imprisonment.

Lodhi appealed his conviction, arguing national security legislation and evidence about his association with convicted French terrorist Willie Brigitte had unduly prejudiced his trial.

He also challenged his sentence on the grounds that it was manifestly excessive when contrasted with similar cases abroad.

The NSW Court of Appeal today emphatically rejected Lodhi's bid, echoing the trial judge's condemnation of his intention to commit a "violent terrorist act".

Chief Justice Jim Spigelman and Justices Derek Price and Graham Barr underscored the important function of the anti-terror laws in protecting society and deterring would-be attackers.

"A terrorism offence is an outrageous offence and greater weight is to be given to the protection of society, personal and general deterrence and retribution," Justice Price said.

"Rehabilitation and personal circumstances should be given very little weight in the case of an offender who is charged with a terrorism offence."

Lodhi's appeal was a litmus test for the terror laws, which have had a number of very public failings in recent months, including the dropping of charges against Sydney medical student Izhar Ul-Haque and Gold Coast doctor Mohammed Haneef.

Any success in his challenge to the proof required for conviction on a preparation charge could have impacted on future terror prosecutions.

The appeals court found terrorist acts were so serious they required a legal provision for intervention at the preparation stage, and even a "threat" deserved "condign punishment".

"Such preparatory acts, even though criminalised, would not at first appear to justify so substantial a penalty," said Chief Justice Spigelman.

"However, the position is different in light of his Honour's clear and justifiable findings of fact that the appellant has not resiled from the extremist intention with which these acts were performed.

"The protection of society requires the offender to be prevented from perpetrating the offences which he was preparing to commit."

Justice Price added: "There was ample evidence from which his Honour could conclude that the appellant held his intentions with great vigour and firmness as a consequence of deeply fanatical views."

The court rejected Lodhi's claim that evidence about Brigitte, who is serving nine years in a French prison for plotting to attack Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, had denied him a fair trial.

It also found international precedents were of "no assistance" in determining sentences in NSW.

Lodhi was not brought to court for today's decision.

He is currently being held at Goulburn's SuperMax facility under conditions of extremely high security, including a requirement he be shackled when outside his cell and remain under constant video surveillance.

With time already served, he will be eligible for release in April 2019, at the expiration of his 15-year non-parole period.