LAST week, Helen Clark, the New Zealand Prime Minister, was asked about the pending execution of the three Bali bombers in Indonesia. She replied: "The New Zealand Government does not support the death penalty under any circumstances.
Clearly these men are guilty of heinous crimes and those crimes, in any jurisdiction, would justify them (getting) very serious penalties available under law but the New Zealand Government will not and does not support the death penalty." Kevin Rudd and his ministers need to say the same thing on our behalf.As well as the Bali bombers, there are at present three young Australians on death row in Indonesia. One is Scott Rush, a drug mule.
Other Australians in the drug trade will face a similar fate. For their sake, we need to put a consistent position on the death penalty now.It would, of course, be crass and illogical to distinguish those on death row according to their nationality or ethnicity. Some people and states who support the death penalty would distinguish murderous terrorists from other criminals such as drug mules. But we Australians have long articulated a universal ban on capital punishment here at home. In dialogue with Indonesia, we do not need to apologise for our universal argument against capital punishment. Anything more nuanced will not help those like Scott Rush who could face a firing squad for being stupid drug mules.To date, Kevin Rudd has said: "In the case of foreign terrorists we are not in the business of intervening on any of their behalfs." It is always a question of prudential statesmanship when to intervene in the domestic affairs of other countries. But even when a decision is taken not to intervene to protect the human rights of foreign nationals in another country, a responsible Australian government can still express its view on the appropriate universal values that we espouse in season and out of season.On the eve of the Bali bombing anniversary during last year's federal election, the now Attorney-General Robert McClelland received a pasting from politicians on both sides of the political fence because he stated unequivocally the Labor Party's universal opposition to capital punishment.Peter Costello said: "Let's have some sympathy for the 88 dead and their families, rather than sympathy for those who cruelly and cold-bloodedly decided to kill them for no reason, other than they were Australians. " We can still have and show sympathy for the deceased victims and their families while maintaining a principled stand against capital punishment.Those of us with sympathy for Scott Rush and his parents, Christine and Lee, can see why it is not only principled but also sensible for the Australian Government to state a constant philosophical position on capital punishment even if it decides to intervene in foreign countries only when one of our own is on death row. It will be a tragedy, and not just for Scott Rush and other Australians facing death row, if Australian politicians welcome or endorse the execution of the Bali bombers.Not to intervene at all while consistently stating one's principles is defensible. To seek or endorse the death penalty for some but not for others when those others happen to be our own will be labelled rank hypocrisy on the streets of Jakarta.
Scott Rush does not deserve to die. He did not commit the worst of offences. He has been arbitrarily singled out for the death sentence by the Indonesian courts with his three accomplice drug mules having been given life sentences or 20 years' imprisonment. His criminal act, if successfully executed, would have caused direct harm in Australia rather than in Indonesia. Our courts would probably have imposed a 10-year sentence with a minimum of five years to serve. Responding to the pending executions of the Bali bombers, the Australian Government should not say or do anything that could jeopardise any attempts to save Rush's life.Rush's execution would be not only bad news for him, his loved ones and other hapless Australian drug mules. His death would unreasonably hamper Australian law enforcement officers co-operating with Indonesian authorities in busting future drug rings attempting to move drugs from Indonesia to Australia. Or else it would place Australian law enforcement officers in the invidious position of routinely handing Australian drug mules over to death regardless of our principled opposition to the death penalty. Killing our impressionable young drug mules, even at Indonesian hands, is too high a price for Australia to pay in combating the importation of illegal drugs. We can co-operate closely in defeating drug smuggling if the Indonesians respect our opposition to the death penalty, especially for what ought to be non-capital offences.While we contemplate the deaths of the Bali bombers, we need to have an eye to sparing the lives of Scott Rush and all those sentenced to death by the state when there are non-lethal means available to protect us from their past or future wrongdoings.
Kevin Rudd could say, "It is not our place to intervene publicly when the Indonesians or even when the Americans decide to execute their own. We Australians believe that capital punishment is wrong. We will always agitate to spare our own from capital punishment, especially when they are convicted of offences deserving less than maximum punishment."While extending our sympathy to the victims and their loved ones when the Bali bombers are executed, our politicians can still affirm our principled opposition to the death penalty. If they cannot, they must refrain from comment that undermines it.
Comments