Good prisoner, bad prisoner
It's been a while since I blogged, so time to set
something down. The plights of various Australians in deep trouble around the
world is worth a bit of a rave. How does the Australian Government justify
various inconsistencies over it's approach to imprisoned Aussies, and how does
this affect their various fates?
The most public face of Australians in overseas
prisons is that of Schapelle Corby, the 27 year old beauty consultant who was
asked to unzip her boogie board cover while passing through customs in Bali,
revealing more than 4 kilograms of marijuana in a clear plastic bag. The
ultimate penalty for such a crime in Indonesia? - Death by firing squad. In
contrast to the justice system in western countries, Corby has been photographed
by camera crews meeting with her family, sobbing through the bars, collapsing on
her way into court, in extreme distress during the court proceedings, and
pleading her innocence directly to those recording her distress. Her fate is not
yet known, though unless in the most unlikely event that she is found not
guilty, it would seem a long term of imprisonment in a Bali cell is the most
likely result, with perhaps an eventual presidential pardon at best, or a
transfer to an Australian prison the most hopeful result. The Australian
Government has voiced its concerns for this tragic case, and as in all
comparisons with overseas transgressions, one cannot but reflect on a 'crime'
which would perhaps be punishable by a hefty fine, or at most a short prison
sentence in Australia. The damage which could/would be caused by the
dissemination of the drugs in question is by any sensible independent view,
modest.
At the height of the publicity
and public sympathy for Corby, comes the so-called 'Bali 9'. It seems the
Australian Federal Police had been keeping track of some young Australians, some
of whom had made a number of trips to Bali in recent months and years. Four of
them, the youngest being just eighteen years old, were detained in the departure
lounge at Dempasar airport, and were filmed as bags of heroin strapped to their
bodies were being removed (the film later sold to commercial television channel
10 in Australia for public consumption). An apparent ringleader of the group,
arrested but carrying no drugs was dubbed the "Godfather" of the group, a
ridiculous title for an apparent small time crook. Other Australians were
arrested in their hotel room with some heroin and scales in the room. All of
these young people, which includes one female, are facing the death by firing
squad penalty. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has stated he has no pity for
the group, although he is opposed, as is the government, to the death penalty.
This begs the question as to why the smugglers were not allowed to enter
Australia before being arrested, where a hefty imprisonment would have been
their fate. The AFP must have known that they were virtually condemning these
foolish young people to death. While heroin is a dangerous, sometimes fatal
drug, it is arguable that it could be less dangerous if it was legalized and
controlled, but leaving that debate aside, what good is served by the death of
these young people? The degree of angst which will surface as the case proceeds
through the courts, to a perhaps inevitable result will be extreme in the months
and years to come.
The obvious and
logical defence the Australian Government can claim is that the crimes occurred
in a foreign country, and that the transgressors are subject to the laws of that
country, albeit a much different system of justice to that of Australia's. What
then, of the kangaroo court of Guantanamo Bay on Cuba, the American lease which
is used conveniently by the US military and Government to forgo the rights of
the US constitution, to imprison without charge, to ignore the Geneva
Conventions, and in which Adelaide's David Hicks has been held for going on four
years? On this disgraceful situation the Australian Government has been
virtually silent. It would seem that the freedom and justice the Coalition of
the Willing bleats about applies only to citizens of the United States, and even
as participants in the coalition, the Australian Government does not have the
guts to demand justice for David Hicks. To the credit of activists in the US,
these illegal imprisonments are being challenged though the courts. No thanks to
the Australian Government, who in this case, don't give a
damn!
The latest perplexing challenge
for the Government is how to handle the case of an American-based Australian
citizen who has been captured by 'insurgents' in Iraq. Douglas Wood has been
operating his business in Iraq, part of which included maintenance within the
'Green Zone', the fortress-like conclave behind which the Americans and their
allies need to retreat to after their forays into the streets of liberated Iraq.
It's hardly the kind of work which he and his family can plead was contributing
to the well being of the Iraqi people - indeed he could be seen to be cashing in
on that unfortunate country's misery. It is a difficult balancing act when one
has to defend the imprisonment and lack of due process for David Hicks, on the
one hand, for being captured by US forces during their invasion of Afghanistan,
while at the same time defending the right of someone to profit by the illegal
invasion of Iraq on the other. The capture and mistreatment of all and sundry in
these situations is a tragedy for the individuals, their families and loved
ones, and for all who desire justice and a fair go. The Australian Government's
squirming and calls for selective justice is sickening and hypocritical. With
close to six hundred locked away for years in Guantanamo Bay with our
government's blessing, and numerous others in refugee gulags in Australia and
Nauru, there is little moral ground to plead
from.
Posted: Thu - September 21, 2006 at 04:49 PM
