Tim Dunlop draws our attention to a post at a leading American law blog, Talk Left, which has been calling for a boycott of Bali over the Schapelle Corby case. As I’ve argued, we need to distinguish between opposition to ludicrously severe sentences for offences related to a recreational drug, and targetting Indonesia as some sort of primitive hell-hole. Aside from legitimate concerns about the importation of drugs by Westerners, and different mores from our own, Indonesia’s tough regime on drugs has also been heavily influenced by the American authorities and their international war on drugs.
Kim said it well:
I think that - in the States at least - the war on drugs has much more to do with social control - particularly containing and incarcerating young black men with few economic opportunities - than anything else. And at another level, it gives the US a foreign policy lever - ie in Colombia and other parts of Latin America.
And in Asia, we could add.
Nor do I like the imputation that the Indonesian legal system is chaotic, unjust or always corrupt. Professor Tim Lindsey from Melbourne Uni made a good point in The Australian yesterday:
Prof Lindsey said Australians should remember that chief judge Linton Sirait also oversaw the case that resulted in a death sentence for Bali bomber Mukhlas.
“That court, those trials were considered to be very reasonably run, very meticulous, and a good result,” Prof Lindsey said.
“Now we have the same judge here in this case and suddenly he’s a bad judge and the case is being run very badly according to popular opinion.
“You can’t have it both ways.”
It is very difficult to form a judgement of the outcome of a trial based solely on media coverage. This is why - rightly I think - there are strict restrictions on comment on ongoing trials in Australia. That’s not only because publicity can be prejudicial to the defendant but also because the media can transmit to the public a quite distorted picture of the legal process.
I agree again with Kim’s take on this:
All this ties in with long held Australian fears about the brown or yellow hordes from the North - same stuff that fuels anxiety and hysteria about refugees as in 2001.
Why do we find it difficult to accept that she might be guilty and that the Indonesian legal system might have delivered her due process of law?
A continuing theme in Australian history has been a xenophobic fear of Asian neighbours to our north. This is deeply ingrained in our culture, and stirring up these sort of sentiments does no-one any good. Particularly not ordinary Balinese people who are still struggling with the after-effects of the Tsunami late last year. The nationalist tub-thumping in the media, particularly on Channel Nine, has been over the top and disturbing. While I have a lot of sympathy with Ms Corby personally, and found her distress in recent media reports moving, I would suggest that this is not the time to react emotionally - for whatever well intentioned reason (and I emphasise that I agree with the criticism of the surveillance and penal regime associated with the war on drugs) - if the result is a rise in racist sentiment and doing economic damage to the Balinese people. There are other and better ways to express concern about these matters - and the target should be the Indonesian state, not the Balinese people.
Elsewhere: David Tiley shares the concern about racist perceptions of Indonesia. There’s some thoughtful analysis and a good roundup of blogosphere reaction at saint’s place.
Update: Some good examples of media hype and xenophobia at The 52nd State.
Fear of overpopulated regimes that have shown expansionist tendencies in the past, and continue to show imperialist tendencies today, is not “racist”. It is simply realistic.
Indonesia could be more properly known as the Javanese Empire, a state in which one ethnic/geographical population has taken control of many neighbouring groups and continues to exert that control by force which is often brutal. As that regime is one of our nearest neighbours, it is right and proper for Australia to be concerned.
As for the “yellow hordes”, it was only sixty years ago that the Japanese Empire was bombing our cities and thretening our territory.
To dismiss a proper appreciation of historical and geopolitical realities as mere “racism” is moronic.
You have a point about the Javanese Empire history, EP, but why that would lead Australia to adopt a defensive and or aggressive posture rather than engaging with Indonesia is beyond me.
We also have to distinguish, as Mark said, between the Indonesian state and the Balinese people.
I very much doubt Ray Martin and the Packer/Murdoch media are motivated by a proper appreciation of geopolitics - more like stirring up xenophobia to make money.
Also, fear of Sweden is moronic. (Had to throw that in because I find myself agreeing in part with you!).
At last, someone who agrees with my moronic fear of Sweden!
I’m not defending Ray Martin or Kerry Packer, but trying to put forward a rational view based on history, politics and demographics.
It’s a fact that Asian nations, like others, have at times invaded their weaker neighbours. What has happened many times before may happen again. I think it is be foolish to dismiss consideration of such realities as “xenophobia”.
Of course, such realisation doesn’t mean we have to adopt a defensive/aggressive posture rather than engaging. It does, however, mean that we would be wise to maintain adequate defence forces and alliances with other powers.
I would say that the events of the last year have demonstrated that Australia’s current government is just as capable of engaging with Indonesia as any other.
The Corby hysteria is a media whirlpool that has dragged a possibly reluctant government along with a massive swell of public opinion. This is way out of proportion and hopefully will fade in time.
This is remarkable. I’d agree with EP that the government’s engagement with Indonesia has been relatively well handled in recent years.
You’d have to concede though - even though you may disagree about the level of concern that I have over the media coverage and its ramifications - that this sort of stuff is not good for bilateral engagement.
The criticism of the Keating government’s posture towards Indonesia (among other points) included criticism that engagement was at the elite diplomatic level and that little was done to promote understanding between Australian and Indonesian peoples. I’d have thought that Bali and the Tsunami - though both tragic events - had some positive spinoffs in that regard - and it’s disappointing to see a revanchist fear/xenophobic attitude encouraged again.
Prof Lindsey said Australians should remember that chief judge Linton Sirait also oversaw the case that resulted in a death sentence for Bali bomber Mukhlas.
“That court, those trials were considered to be very reasonably run, very meticulous, and a good result,” Prof Lindsey said.
“Now we have the same judge here in this case and suddenly he‚Äôs a bad judge and the case is being run very badly according to popular opinion.
“You can‚Äôt have it both ways.”
“Were considered” by whom? I’m not a big fan of the death penalty, either.
It’s a ridiculously harsh penalty, and its a system in which it’s almost impossible to be acquitted of that charge. Serious flaws, I’d suggest.
That’s as may be, Mr Lefty and I oppose both the death penalty, and I’ve made clear, the war on drugs regime and associated sentencing practices.
I still think there are disturbing elements of xenophobia in the reaction to it and I still question why this level of outrage has not been manifested for Australian citizens of Vietnamese extraction facing the death penalty in Singapore and Thailand.
The media treatment of Corby does play on Australian racist and xenophobic attitudes. The whole affair has a real mesh of race, class and gender issues. I’m inclined to think her innocent, on the coals to newcastle principle. However if she had been an Asian Australian, like the others in gaols in SE Asia some facing the death penalty, I doubt there would have been any of this hullabaloo. I’ll be very intersted to see how the Bali 9 fare in our media. Already there’s been the targetting of the Asian Austrlaian as the ‘baddie’ as opposed to all the Euro-Australians.
It’s intersting to reflect that if Corby had been sprung with the dope in Qld not many years ago she would have faced a mandatory life sentence under Joh’s tough on drugs laws (Labor did change those laws in the 90s didn’t it?). I personally think the ‘war on drugs’ is almost as ridiculous, dangerous and corrupting as the ‘war on terror’. The sooner both are wound up and relegated to history the better.
“I still question why this level of outrage has not been manifested for Australian citizens of Vietnamese extraction facing the death penalty in Singapore and Thailand.”
For the same reason that a skinny, middle-aged, Aussie guy with bad teeth and speed psychosis wouldn’t have been big news in Denpasar in Corby’s place. She’s the classic damsel in distress meets Kath and Kim via the cover of New Idea. Australians have been watching soap operas for 40 years. We instinctively know what the appropriate emotional response is here. There’s around 150 Australians incarcerated overseas but none of the others fit the primetime profile and sheer marketability of Schapelle. You might remember that the media was momentarily engaged recently with the case of the two teenage surfers from Byron who held up a bank in Aspen. Promising material, but those boys ultimately couldn’t hold the audience. And you wonder why a couple of Vietnamese hoods with Aussie passports
aren’t hogging the limelight Mark? They should be calling Ron Bakir.
Whatver our views on the War on Drugs, the morality thereof isn’t the compelling point. No-one can be in any doubt about the dire risks involved in drug trafficking anywhere in South-East Asia. It’s a greatly enhanced risk for westerners given that Asian governments have historically viewed “the drug problem” as a product of colonialism (the Opium Wars)on the one hand and decadent western permissiveness on the other.
The moral panic over the Indonesian justice system seems particularly stupid to me. Would Channel 9 be more outraged if an ignorant blonde bogan from the suburbs had been picked up in a military sweep of Afghanistan and spent years, incommunicado, without charge in an orange jumpsuit in Cuba? Oh, wait…
Whilst I can understand the need for people to want to punish Indonesia for the apparently wrongful imprisonment of Schapelle Corby, I find that I cannot condone openly hostile campaigns against the country, or against the people of Bali.
However, as a free thinking human being who has the ability to reason, I find the Corby circumstance to be uniquely disturbing. Given the situation she has found herself in, the clearly incompetant legal defence available to her on the basis of a telephone call on the day, the inability of that defence to provide same, the rigidity of the Indonesian legal system with regard to possession and probable happenstance, and lastly but most definitely not least, the well known and highly likely probability of the Indonesian customs officials having been ‘bought’, I, personally, could not in any reasonable length of future time find myself willing to travel in Indonesia, or indeed, any closely neighboured country in South-East Asia.
REad that as you will, but for mine, placing ones self in harms way for no rational benefit is simply illogical.
liam - you just beat me to it.
Totally agree with your post but… why would ordinary Balinese people be struggling from the aftermath of the tsunami? It didn’t touch Bali.
I’m sure the media coverage of the Corby case has been overdone. Even on the ABC I would have rather that the 7.30 Report last night in Qld maintained normal programming. Almost certainly it would have concentrated on the problems in Qld health and the Bundaberg Hospital disaster where it seems 87 deaths have been linked to a surgeon who has now done a runner with an air ticket paid by the taxpayers and with a glowing letter of reference in his pocket. Instead we had Kezza rabbiting on about Corby.
But that is in part because I’d heard it over and over on radio and more importantly had heard the business end of the judgement.
btw Arief Budiman says that while the Indonesian justice system is improving it can still be corrupt. He thinks that the media focus has meant that the Corby case was played by the book.
My worry is that after a prima facie case is established it seeems the accused must prove their innocence. This did seem to come through in the judgement. Budiman says the judges were waiting for someone to pop up and admit they had put the drugs in the bag. It is almost impossible to meet that expectation. It is arguable that the verdict was a foregone conclusion and the trial was simply about the severity of the sentence. According to this report:
In their decision the judges said the defendant had said the marijuana was not hers, “however, the lawyers could not prove who the owners are”.
That is certainly how I heard the judgement also.
I recall a case some years ago now in athletics where an Australian athlete returned a positive doping test. The boss man of Olympic athletics, a Hungarian at the time they were just emerging from Communism, immediately declared the athlete guilty. However, the case had to be investigated and reviewed judicially in Australia. I recall that the Australian judge found that at one stage in the process the samples were not secure. On these grounds alone he threw the case out. He didn’t need to come up with a person or persons who did the tampering, or even had the opportunity or motivation to tamper. There was a hole in the procedures and that was enough. On the balance of probabilities the athlete was possibly guilty, but the standard of proof was ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
In the Corby case there were heaps of people who potentially had access to Corby’s bag. Even after Qantas had tightened the procedures an entertainer was staggered to look out onto the tarmac and see a luggage handler clowning about in his camel suit.
Forget the Ford character, who was an unreliable witness. But what about this?
Evidence from a baggage handler in Brisbane, Scott Speed, was also put aside because the testimony “did not support the explanation from the defendant” that baggage handlers had placed the marijuana in Corby’s bag. His evidence was on general procedures for checking baggage and did not relate specifically to her case.
Forget that everyone and his dog amongst the luggage handlers had access to her bag and that the alternative story of a shipment intended for Sydney from Brisbane drug dealers was on the face of it more plausible than Ms Corby carting expensive drugs to Bali where they are cheap and plentiful.
The judgement also made reference to the importance of the Indonesian Government’s campaign against drugs. Although this was mentioned only in relation to the sentence, one can’t help thinking that the case may have been seen as exemplarary. In other words it was sending a message that drugs would not be tolerated and that further that individual travellers must take and bear responsibility for their baggage. I wonder too whether in Indonesia society is seen as more important than the individual and individuals can be sacrificed for the greater good.
The judge seemed to place great weight on the evidence of the customs officer who claimed that Corby said something like “There is something in there!” This was taken as evidence of her admitting she knew that the drugs were in the bag. If you were used to how big your boogie bag looks and it suddenly appeared fatter, might you not say something similar?
Anyway it is all sad, sad, sad.
I regret the racism in Australian attitudes. I’m inclined to think that it won’t make much difference to our relations with Indonesia and Indonesians. The pollies are sophisticated enough, from what I’ve seen of them, not to let that affect them. Tim Palmer said, as I recall, that the Indonesian people mostly wouldn’t know about Schapelle Corby as there had been little media coverage. There was some after the judgement, negatively featuring the reaction of her Mum, but I’m sure that will pass. As will any dimunition of the flow of tourists to Bali.
So I don’t know whether she did it, but I don’t think her guilt can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Indeed when the loose-ness of the baggage security became clear I can’t see how any thinking, agenda-free judge could convict her. That is if you are deemed innocent until proven guilty.
For her sins will burn. Now in Bali Big Brother. Whens the vote?
Remember Kafka’s Trial? I don’t think racism has much to do with it. Indonesia, in fact SE Asia is a bit of an extension of many Australian’s lives, they live, work and holiday there. I think the Corby case connected up two major fears, the frame-up of the innocent -it could have been us- and the sudden realisation we can’t trust many of the people who handle our daily affairs, such as baggage handlers, police, courts, our governments. The good or innocent can get led out into the forest in the early dawn for a quick shot in the back of the head. Watch what happens when some of the other lot get shot! I also think that buried deeply under it all is the vaguest memory of the 25 years our Govts lied to us about Timor and the Indonesians. And remember the massacres in Timor are only a couple of years ago. The boil-up over the inactivity of the Govt in getting soldiers into Timor to stop the murders was palpable at the time. If the Indonesians wanted a war over Timor at the time most Australians would have been quite happy to oblige. I think Howard is a coward in that he can make noises about Corby but won’t over Hicks. Now is the time to start an assertive jail break campaign for all those locked up in detention centres in Australia, and for a few of those in Gitmo.
why would ordinary Balinese people be struggling from the aftermath of the tsunami? It didn’t touch Bali.
Sorry, Kent, in that context I meant to write “Indonesian people”.
To Kevin,
Talking about East Timor, what do you think about your government only give a very small proportion of oil to East Timor government rightnow? Leaving them freely from Indonesia with longlife poverty in the future? Is that true that Australian backed up East Timor for a humantiarian cause? or MONEY/OIL cause?
I feel pity about what happens to Corby. But I wonder how if she’s actually guilty? If she’d like to bring that marijuana to be enjoy with her friends in exotic environment of Bali pretending that as an Australian superior economically to Indonesian make her above the law and untouchable? And even if she’s innocent, is it a right thing to do boycotting Bali and it’s innocent people? Still I feel pity about her, but it’s quiet enraging me when I heard about boycotting Bali and even asking back for your tsunami donation. I will really look down on Australians if you do things so shamelessly. I am sure that Australian are not that unwise as a civilized community. I do hope so.
From memory I believe the AFP provided crucial assistance in the Bali Bombing case which enabled evidence to be collected and factually presented in court. This probably assisted in having a well run court
The question i have is had the evidence presented in the Corby case been presented in an Australian court what would have been the result ? Would it have been admissable ?
Also how many Chief Justices do you know in Australia giving interviews boasting about how many people they have found guilty
That counterfactual is a bit hard to get to grips with, BJ. The big problem I can see is possible contamination of the chain of evidence. That would most likely not have happened in Australia. Had Corby been apprehended in Australia, I think she would have been convicted. Her statement that the bag was hers and the drugs were hers is not hearsay but direct evidence by several witnesses. If she indeed said that, that would have been damning. Nor would the case have been televised, or attracted so much media attention, and the judges would not have given interviews to the media. She probably would have received a sentence of around 3 years in gaol.
I’m not saying she’s guilty, but I don’t think on the facts her defence team established reasonable doubt in the legal sense.
In Brisbane there was a case a few years ago of a young former female model who went to gaol for possession of drugs in quantities which showed that they could not have been intended for her personal use. There wasn’t much media attention.
Her statement that the bag was hers and the drugs were hers is not hearsay but direct evidence by several witnesses.
Mark, if her admission was as clear as that, then I agree she’s gone. It’s not the way I heard it, however. The way I heard it she of course admitted ownership of the bag and could see that something extra was in the bag and said something to that effect. In doing this she was admitting a fact which was as obvious as the nose on her face. It is not the same, however, as saying that she owned the extra something or that she put it there. As I understand it there was a language problem at the time.
Possibly the defence did not explicate this event clearly enough. Possibly the judges lacked a bit of curiosity/imagination or an understanding of the problems of communication that translation can bring.
It is also likely that the extra thickness in the bag may have stimulated her to actions in the confusion of the moment that were later constued as foreknowledge and guilt.
In any event the appeal, I understand, is a paper appeal unless new evidence is brought forward. The two QCs experienced in Asian law made available by the Aust’n government (one is already there working on the defence of the Bali 9) should give her a chance.
I’ve heard conflicting stories on this, Brian, and I think it adds to my point that we can’t judge this issue through media reports.
A QC working in Bali on behalf of the Bali 9? Who engaged him? Who’s paying?
I dunno, wbb, but I get the impression that some of them may not be altogether poor. He’s going to work pro bono on the Corby thing.
Mark, you’re right. It was interesting, though, that the ABC’s Lisa Miller reported the said QC (Percy, I think his name was) as saying there may have been a different outcome in one of our courts. I heard that a couple of times, and then the later version of the story was changed to him saying the sentence may have been different. Curious.
News just reported pople only donating to Red Shield appeal today on condition the money didn’t go to Indonesia.
Probably a channel ten beat up but anyone who did say that? Is fragging evil.
Evil is a bit strong, Amanda. Overwrought perhaps.
I sat on a jury in Australia recently involving a person with a bag that contained a trafficable amount of drugs. Despite having a QC put forward all sorts of arguments not dissimilar to Corby’s, the person was found guilty and recieved a sentence of 4 years.
The slagging off of the Indonesian legal system in the wake of the Corby decision is just plain embarrasing.
Why were the Bali 9 arrested in Indonesia instead of being alowed to return to Australia? The ‘War on Drugs’ got a whole week of front page publicity because Aussie boys and girls may face the death penalty. A week later a bust in Australia, with more than twice the amount of drugs involved, barely made page three and promptly died.
What was the drug, Michael?
I’m with Niall on this - I don’t see how a sensible person could go to Bali (unless they were there specifically to visit something in Bali which couldn’t be seen elsewhere) given alternative sun & surf destinations that DON’T involve putting yourself at risk of the death penalty for having your bag tampered with.
Visiting Indonesia is still worthwhile, in the same sense that visiting North Korea is worthwhile - it’s educational. But it’s bloody dangerous.
I agree with Mr. Lefty and Niali. Just don’t go there. It is only common sense that you don’t go somewhere where you are threatened. It’s simple cause and effect. It may be a sad thing for the people of Bali, who are not to blame for draconian laws, but it’s a free market, and I’m glad if the people who rule Indonesia with such laws and judges pay for their choices.
Youre right wbb. “evil” in the colloquial sense. (Nelson is evil!) certaintly devoid of all compassion which makes me wonder why they would donate in the first place.
I’m with Amanda on this one. Imagine the reaction if there was a national disaster in Australia and people in New Zealand refused to donate because of our violations of the human rights of asylum seekers. You don’t use compassion as a political weapon no matter what the cause. Or rather, you shouldn’t.
Public reaction is all over the shop at the moment. Not worth making too many harsh judgements until things settle down a bit when the shock jocks move on and find something fresher to gnaw on.
Yeah, wbb, but the attitudes that allow the media to mobilise public opinion in this direction were there before Channel 9, the papers and the shock jocks weighed in, and will persist (probably strengthened) after they’ve moved on.
Those attitudes are eternal and will inevitably arise whenever sufficiently emotive conditions constellate.
There’s nothing to be done about that.
So therefore the role of the media as the instrument which can concentrate such feelings into a dangerous force is critical. Is why once the media has moved on, things will be fine after a period. Which is to say they’ll be as they were before.
imho, you over-emphasise the xenophobic content of the public emotion. The xenophobia is the yellowy fleck on the crest of a wave that was born out of human sympathy for the plight of an individual.
Outliers of public expression, no matter how vicious, are outliers but of course they are reported and thus become falsely representative of the general mood.
Have a read of some of the comments on the message boards, wbb. And the news tonight reported firebombing threats against Indonesian businesses in Australia. After s11, a schoolbus full of kids going to an Islamic school in Brisbane was stoned, and mosques firebombed. The media has a grave duty not to encourage such attitudes which readily manifest in violence against Australian citizens and their institutions as well.
wbb, the drug in that case was cocaine. The point was that the person was convicted and punished according to the laws of this country, as has Corby in Indonesia, for being unable to provide a verifiable explanation for how the package was in their bag.
I don’t see it as necessarily xenophobia, more yet another indication of how little it takes to bring out the worst in people.
heya i love this site
and her schapelle is so innocent and i believe she shouldnt be in jail at all!!
Thread necromancy!
I’m sure Ally came here from the massive number of google hits for Schapelle related content - but anyway, thanks for the comment!
The reason alot of aussies think that shes innocent has nothing to do with her anglosaxon features or what race she is , its more to do with logical deductions and the circumstances . She dosent fit the profile and of course people can say whats the profile etc , but not only dosent she fit the profile it dosent make any sense no matter how you look at it .For one the drugs are worth 10 times the amount in australia and having been to bali before on numerous occasions like corby , the one thing you know is that youd have to mad to take drugs in or out of indonesia knowing that the death penalty applies . I belive it was planted for the pure reason that days before one of the muslim clerics was sentenced for his part in bombings .It also seems apparent that 2 days ago 3 bombs went of again bali which coincides with the fact that 3 people were just charged over the australian embassy bombing .Am i the only one that sees these coincidences ? Can anyone suggest if this fits in with a muslim extremist system of law ,like an eye for an eye etc . I think theres definately something there .The other thing i have a problem with is lets say schappele is guilty , do you think it makes sense to give organisers of bombings a far lighter sentence than someone with marujuana , i think its like a slap in the face .As far as the tourist trade there goes half of the balinese couldnt care less for us australians all they care about is the money we provide ,an example of this is in the recent bombings locals were trying to convince toruist that it was only a gas cylinder exploding .Maybe if we boycott bali the balinese might be abit less accepting of the bombers and there organisations and abit more apprecaitive of tourist.