Detachment 88, Torture, Australian Funding...

There is nothing quite like getting rolled as Prime Minister, winning your seat in a hung parliament, being commissioned as Foreign Affairs Minister, and having to have discussions with your nearest neighbour as to whether Australian money is being used to fund torture; such is the life of Kevin Rudd.

I am guessing that Kev '07 has not actually had to have any discussions on this hot potato just yet, but rest assured these happy chats are on the horizon. Some officials from the Australian Embassy in Jakarta have already done some preliminary leg work in determining whether the allegations have any substance. It would be a rare occurrence in Indonesia if this sort of smoke was not based on a little fire somewhere. The chances are that there is some substance to these allegations.

So, what are the allegations? Detachment 88 is a special Indonesian police unit that was created to be at the forefront of counter terrorism initiatives in Indonesia. The unit receives substantial levels of funding, and training, from the Australian government. Detachment 88 was formed in the wake of the Bali Bombings. The number 88 represents the number of Australians who lost their lives in the first Bali Bombings. Other meanings for the number 88 range from the number 8 looks like a pair of handcuffs to 8 being a lucky number.

The allegations are that Detachment 88 were responsible for the torture of a number of activists / separatists in the province of Maluku from 2007 through to 2010. The torture includes beatings with wooden and steel bars, forced sexual activity, being burned with lit cigarettes, plastic bags being placed over prisoners' heads, and being stabbed with nails and other sharp objects.

This is a "no brainer". Australia must stop all funding to Detachment 88 pending a review of the allegations. If the allegations do not pan out, then the funding can resume with a much greater level of confidence in the understanding that the money is being used for the purposes intended. If the allegations are proved, then those guilty of committing crimes must be prosecuted to the full extent possible under Indonesian law.

Paying others to do our dirty work in ensuring that we remain safe as we travel in Indonesia does not allow us to hide behind the claim that end justifies the means or that we should turn a blind eye to the occasional indiscretion.

Are we prepared to let Detachment 88 torture Indonesians under the guise of counter-terrorism when really what they are doing is seeking to suppress domestic political dissent? Are the human rights of our neighbours negotiable because they are there and we are here?

What price are we prepared to pay for safety and freedom from fear?

Ho hum...

Commuting the Sentences of Bali Bombers...

There has been a suggestion by Indonesian prison authorities that two of the Bali Bombers should have their life sentences commuted to 20 years in prison on the basis of their good behaviour since being incarcerated. The pair, Abdul Ghoni and Sawad are unrepentant about their actions and suggest that they believe the three Bali Bombers that have been executed will be forgiven by God, if indeed their actions were wrong. There is no remorse for the killing of 202 people.

These men have not shown that they deserve to have their sentences commuted. The idea that these fellows should ever breathe air as free men again is likely to be objectionable to any one who lost family or friends in the 2002 bombings of the Sari Club and Paddy's.

However, if the Indonesian authorities see fit to commute these sentences from life to 20 years then it only seems reasonable that the authorities also see fit to commute the death sentences of Scott Rush, Myuran Sukumaran, and Andrew Chan to at the very least life in prison. Considering, the drugs these individuals were carrying were destined for Australia and were not likely to be killing any Indonesians then it makes sense that their death penalties be commuted to 20 years or so. The others should all have their respective sentences commuted or amended in similar ways.

If Ghoni or Sawad have their sentences commuted, then there is no justifiable reason that the Indonesian authorities and government could make to keep Schapelle Corby in jail for her full sentence.

It is about time that the legal reform movement also took stock of their successes to date, and mapped out a more encouraging road forward. This road must include work on sentencing and remission reform. This is not a case of "if the system ain't broke", but rather a case of the system being irreparably damaged and needing a complete reconfiguration. A simple botox job to remove the wrinkles is no longer a good enough response.

Hambali and the Bali Bombings

Riduan Isamuddin (AKA Hambali) was arrested in Thailand in 2003, and after having been the alleged recipient of some free travel around the world to a number of ghost prisons, ended up in Guantanamo Bay as a guest of the US. This is presumably for the duration of the war on terror. However, since Barack Obama has taken office, it has become a little uncertain as to what lies ahead for some of these detainees.

In any event, there is little doubt that Hambali gave up a fair bit of intelligence under the enhanced interrogation techniques used on him, like waterboarding. Nevertheless, even with the favourable rules of evidence that the military tribunals were going to be working under, the US has some doubts that it could currently make a case against Hambali for the Bali Bombings. Hambali was the head of a Jemaah Islamiyya cell that had operational responsibilities for Malaysia and Singapore. This cell was known as Mantiqi One.

The problem is apparently not a lack of evidence, but rather a lack of evidence that prosecutors would be able to adduce and then use in court to prove Hambali's guilt. Nevertheless, it is generally thought that Hambali ordered the targeting of "soft targets" and was the main man when it came to funding the bombings.

Yet, the US authorities are a lot more confident that they can link him to a string of other bombings in Indonesia. It has only been this year that the Indonesian authorities have been granted access to Hambali for interrogation purposes. This is interesting in itself as the majority of Hambali's alleged crimes have occurred in Indonesia and have predominantly killed Indonesians. The two series of bombings that the authorities believe present as the strongest cases against Hambali are the Marriott bombing of 2003 and the Christmas Eve bombings.

If the military tribunals are reconvened, and the rules are not drastically changed, then it would seem that military prosecutors would seek to see Hambali charged with murder and then pursue the death penalty for him.

Indonesia's Most Wanted Malaysian -- Part III

Most of the recent reports are suggesting that the of the men killed in yesterday's raids against Noordin M Top and his associates have not, as initially reported, resulted in the death of Top. This might be a big dampener for Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, who has reportedly already called Indonesia's President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY), to inquire about Top and congratulate his Indonesian counterpart on killing Top.

Australia's Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, has been a little more realistic in stating that it is still too early to tell whether any of those killed is Top. So, rather than speculate, he is going to wait and see. Although, what is clear is that the Australian government is appreciative of the efforts of Indonesia and the fight against terror.

Top is responsible for a large number of deaths, and the deaths of almost 100 Australians, in a series of bombings starting with the first Bali bombings of 2002.

I would not be sad if Top was killed yesterday. I would also not be sad if he was killed at some point in the future during a similar raid. If the man is guilty of the crimes that he has alleged to have committed, then there is no reason that I can conceive of to be sad. However, this lack of sadness must not be construed as condoning his killing.

To the contrary, my preference would be to see the man caught, interrogated, and then tried for his crimes. It is clear what a guilty verdict would mean in this case, particularly when one considers the sentences that were handed down to foot soldiers like Amrozi, Mukhlas, and Samudra.

Confirmation, one way or the other, will happen over the next week or so.

Postscript...
Then again, maybe not a week or so. Counter-terrorism forces are anonymously confirming that the fingerprints of the dead terrorist do not match those of Noordin M Top.

This is not good. The longer this man evades capture and succeeds in killing innocent people his status among his followers only increases as does the likelihood that his following among those vulnerable to his influence will also increase.

The Terror Master Plan for Indonesia -- Noordin M. Top

The idea of a terrorism master plan for Indonesia being in existence since at least 2002 and known to anti-terror authorities since 2005 is hardly surprising. The master plan was found on the computer of Azahari bin Husin who was shot dead by police in November of 2005. Azahari and Noordin M. Top worked closely together in the planning and carrying out of terrorist bombings in Indonesia. And, they are both Malaysian.

What is surprising is that it is only being made much more fully public in 2009. Even if one were to give the relevant authorities the benefit of the doubt that parts of this master plan had to be kept secret in the immediate aftermath of its discovery, does not justify it being kept secret through to 2009.

The master plan allegedly shows that the perpetrators of the most recent bombings, who are now being directly linked to Top, are part of this plan. The master plan also suggests that there is more public exposure on an international scale if places that are world-renowned are targeted or the victims are high-profile. High profile in this context notes explicitly that business executives will provide as much, if not more, media coverage for the cause than a couple of tourists.

The suggestion here is clearly that James Castle's business round table was the target of the suicide bomber. The intent being to kill and maim as many of the business people in attendance there as possible. By all accounts the terrorists fulfilled that mission.

Furthermore, the master plan also makes it clear that Bali remains a viable target. The viability of Bali is that it will provide large-scale media exposure. The Bali Bombings of 2002 shows this to be true. Probably scarier still is that the master plan suggests that prime tourist targets include fast food restaurants (such as KFC, McDonalds, among others), taxi queues at airports and other places where tourists congregate in order to travel, art markets (with the art market at Ubud being specifically singled out), open-air restaurants, movie theatres, shopping centers, and the Kuta beach.

This is scary because most people just figured that terrorists would be targeting hotels and nightclubs, or other places of late night entertainment. However, this is clearly not the case if the master plan is to be believed.

My folks go to Bali every year. If anyone asks them about terrorism and do they feel threatened, the answer is always a resounding, no! The rationale or justification for their confidence is that they do not visit bars and pretty much only sleep at the hotel in amongst trips to the beach and some shopping. Their most recent trips to Bali have seen them staying with friends and not in a hotel.

This might no longer be a sensible rationale for those that stay in hotels and go to Bali just to shop and laze around on the beach.

The bombing at the Ritz-Carlton clearly showed that the bombers were targeting the Airlannga restaurant. It is one of the restaurants where guests can have their complimentary included breakfast for staying at the hotel. If the plan is to target breakfast time at major hotels in Bali, then the potential for mass casualties is a real one.

The fact that this master plan exists, and assuming that Australian authorities were aware of it, then the travel advisories issued by the Australian government and other governments were accurate when they stated things such as "intelligence exists that Bali remains a target for terrorists" (or words to that effect).

What this all means? To each their own. I would not hesitate to return to Indonesia, anywhere in Indonesia, Bali included. My philosophy on life has always been, "if your numbers up, then your numbers up!" Nevertheless, that said, it is always important to be aware of your own personal safety and make sure that you do everything you can to ensure that you do not put yourself in harms way.

Yet, when it is all said and done, if we let the terrorists dictate our lives through the use of fear, then we may still have our lives but we do not have our freedom.

The CIA Did It -- Abu Bakar Ba'asyir Speaks!

Abu Bakar Ba'asyir is never one for a dull moment. Some might like to describe the man as a radical or fundamentalist Muslim committed to the creation of a pan-Asian Caliphate at just about any cost, including providing support for terrorism. I certainly believe that the man is pro-terror, particularly where people are not prepared to accept what he says or come around to his way of thinking or world view.

However, he is also a bit of a conspiracy theorist it seems, and true to form he has determined that the most recent bombings at the JW Marriott and the Ritz-Carlton hotels in Jakarta were the work of the CIA. This is not the first time that the Head of the Jemaah Ashorut Tauhid, which is a rather loose coalition of Islamic groups keen to see a more universal adoption and implementation of Syariah Law, has blamed the CIA for bombings perpetrated in Indonesia.

In the aftermath of the Bali Bombings in 2002, in which he himself was implicated, he maintained that the bombings were not the work of Islam but of the CIA that was looking to discredit Islam. The claim was that based on the devastation at the Paddy Club in Bali that the bomb was a micro-nuclear device and that it was launched from a US warship off the coast of Bali.

By his own admission, Ba'asyir knows nothing about bombs or how to make them, but in his mind the only thing that makes sense is that the CIA has carried out the bombings as a means of sowing hate against Islam. The idea that Ba'asyir knows nothing is, at best, disingenuous.

Ba'asyir also addressed the issue of Jemaah Islamiyah and the belief that it has splintered into two factions. According to Ba'asyir the Jemaah Anshorut Tauhid is not a splinter group of Jemaah Islamiyah or of the Indonesian Mujahideen Council (Majelis Mujahideen Indonesia / MMI). As far as Ba'asyir knows, Jemaah Islamiyah is an Egyptian Muslim study group.

Never one to miss an opportunity, Ba'asyir added that the US and Australia will never defeat Islam and in fact they fear us ("us" I am guessing is Islam). He cites the fear that the US and Australia have of al-Qaeda, which he calls a small group. By my reckoning neither the US and Australia are trying to defeat Islam or make it subservient to some Western Christian ideal.

From a religious perspective Ba'asyir condemned the bombings as not being in accordance with Islam. The not in accordance with Islam part relies on the fact that there has been no formal declaration of war. To bomb "targets" without a formal declaration of war contravenes Islamic or Syariah law principles. Further, he goes on to say that the killing of innocent women and children is wrong even if these women and children are kafir.

However, this is moderated by "if they get involved, even in thought, then they must be killed". There does not seem to be any leeway on that front, and the idea that a mere thought is enough to warrant a killing opens the door to many killings as the idea of a thought seems so very discretionary.

If Ba'asyir did not have any followers and his Al-Mukmin Islamic Boarding School did not have such a long track record of breeding willing and able terrorists, the man would be nothing more than a distraction. However, he succeeds on both these points and this makes him a particularly dangerous man. This is sad because he so does not represent the majority of Indonesians or what Indonesia is about. There appears to be little doubt that there are quite a few Indonesians who wish that he stayed in exile in Malaysia.

No Remorse rather Defiance

The happy-go-lucky murderous trio of Amrozi, Samudra, and Mukhlas (photo is from AP and is of Mukhlas and Amrozi) continue to show no remorse for their actions that resulted in the deaths of 202 innocent children, women, and men.

To the contrary, the trio is proud of the horror that they perpetrated as this is what the infidels deserve. Samudra went as far as to say he would never apologise to the infidel.

In a move that they think will scare the Indonesian government into postponing the executions indefinitely, the three have guaranteed that retribution will be swift and furious if they are ever executed.

My personal opinion is that they have gotten a little carried away with their own celebrity and are overplaying their hand a little bit. The fact that these three convicted mass murderers have not been executed should be a source of embarrassment for the government of Indonesia.

Amrozi is not only not remorseful but confident that if he ever had the chance to do the same again he would without hesitation. The chances of jail ever rehabilitating him and preparing him for re-integration to the community is somewhere between zero and a snowflake's chance in hell.

The other claim these wanna be warriors of Allah are making is that any one involved in the execution will be forever condemned by God. Interesting that God does not condemn three men who ripped away the lives of so many in the name of their religion.

If this thought of eternal condemnation spooks the firing squad, I am sure there will be a line of people willing to take the shots themselves, and with no real care whether the three die quickly or slowly and in considerable pain. For many the pain of their losses on 12 October 2002 is still raw.

These men still believe that there was honour in their actions. I am yet to hear any justification that makes sense that these are the actions of honourable men. More to the point, all the talk now seems to be about avoiding the execution that they have been sentenced to. Where is the bravery now? I would have thought that the sooner the execution the better as you will be with God and a martyr to the cause.

These men are cowards of the highest order they are prepared to send innocents to their deaths but they are not prepared to die in the name of the cause themselves. It is strange that they think themselves to be so special, the chosen ones.

Even more interesting is that the three do not think that they will be executed this year! I wonder do they know something that the rest of us do not know. After all it was the Minister of Law and Human Rights that said that these three would be executed immediately after Eid ul-Fitr. It is time for the Indonesian Government to ante up and do what is required by law to be done.

Bali Bombers, Eid ul-Fitr, and Remorse

The three Bali Bombers that are destined for the firing squad in the very near future, perhaps in just days, have expressed no remorse about their actions and the deaths of 202 innocent people. Amrozi, Samudra, and Muklhas have stated unequivocally that they have no regrets for the bombings of 12 October 2002.

The bombings were designed to punish the US and its allies. Seeing that the majority of those that died were allies of the US then the objective was achieved. Samudra is the most vocal of the three, always has been, and he added that he will never have any regrets. Unfortunately for him, he won't have too much longer to hold that thought. The three of them then offered their support and praise for the recent bombing of the Marriott Hotel in Pakistan.

The time is nigh and the end is ever-closer. You will soon know if Allah is pleased and has prepared the legendary 72 virgins for your eternal pleasure. Then again, if Islam is a religion of peace and abhors the slaying of the innocent then I cannot see your eternity being all that enjoyable!

I would still prefer that they rot in prison but it is not within my power to make that call. So, 'selamat jalan' and may God have mercy on your misguided and murderous souls (yes, the very mercy you did not show 202 innocent souls on 12 October 2002).

Bali Bombers and Eid Remissions

In Indonesia when a person is sentenced in a criminal matter they are sentenced to a term of imprisonment. Unlike Australia they are not sentenced to a Head Sentence and a Non-Parole period.

Therefore, prisoners in Indonesia are given remissions for good behaviour and offer things. These remission normally happen twice a year. The first is in recognition of Independence Day and the other is generally at the time of the religious holiday of the prisoner. For Muslims, this would be Eid ul-Fitr (Idul Fitri in Indonesia).

Those prisoners that have been sentenced to life in prison or to death do not get to enjoy any remissions. It is uncommon for death sentences to be commuted to life and similarly for life sentences to be reset to a definite period of incarceration once the sentences have been handed down and affirmed on appeal.

The Department of Law and Human Rights has received recommendations for remissions from throughout the archipelago. These recommendations include nine individuals that were convicted and sentenced to prison in relation to the Bali Bombings I (five individuals) and II (four individuals).

The remissions recommended are for between one and two months. It is worth noting that the nine convicts involved received remissions of five months and three months in August as part of the Independence Day remissions.

Terrorism Threat in Bali

The Gubernatorial Election in Bali is getting into full swing. One of the candidates, I Made Mangku Pastika, is a name that is familiar to many Australians touched by or interested in the Bali Bombings of 2002 and their direct aftermath. Pastika was the point man in many ways on the investigation that eventually resulted in the capture of the perpetrators of that evil.

Interestingly, Pastika has gone on the record to say that not enough has been done in the interim to secure Bali from future terrorist attacks. The increasing of this security is going to be one of the themes of his campaign it seems. Simply, Pastika's argument is that the level and quality of security on Bali does not meet international standards. The interesting part is that the US has recently withdrawn its travel warnings which suggests that the US, at least, considers Indonesia to be relatively safe for tourist travel.

Australia has so far been reluctant to lift its travel warning. The Australian government continues to cite reports of possible terrorist activity. If anything Pastika's statements will provide a little bit of breathing room to keep the travel warning in place. My take on travel warnings and in particular the Australian Travel Warning for Indonesia was that it was a legal document that the government would trot out to say, "we told you so", we will help repatriate you but you will have to pay all costs associated with that repatriation because we warned you and you ignored us.

Nevertheless, Pastika goes on to say that although he respects the Australian government's right to warn and protect its citizens, he feels that if tourists stay away from Bali then the terrorists have won. Only by continuing to come to Bali and to come in numbers, can we say to the terrorists, you lose! This has always been my position, to fold in the face of terrorism means that the terrorists win an undeserved victory over those of us who value freedom and tolerance.

Travel warning or not Bali remains a wonderful place to visit (Photo)!

Bali Gubernatorial Election -- Administrative Law Issues

Legal issues and elections in Indonesia are not a new phenomenon and it seems that the Bali Gubernatorial election is not going to be an exception. One of the candidates is someone most Indonesians and many Australians will be familiar with I Made Mangku Pastika.

Pastika was the point man for Indonesia in the aftermath of the first Bali Bombings.

The legal issues here are not so complicated. Nevertheless, there seems to be some confusion about exactly what status Pastika must have before he can legally run as a candidate. The issue is that Pastika is a currently serving police officer. Technically, current police officers, members of the armed forces, and civil servants cannot run for elected office while maintaining their employment status.

The argument focuses on the National Police Law which some legal commentators suggest requires Pastika to resign permanently from the National Police Force before seeking elected office. In contrast the local Balinese ordinance only require that the prospective candidate resign temporarily from their position. This is based on a Regional Election Commission Circular issued in Bali, No. 5 of 2008, which only requires a temporary resignation.

Pastika has temporarily resigned from his position in the National Police Force as Head of the National Narcotics Agency and has a letter to that effect from the National Police Chief, General Sutanto.

The General Election Commission for Bali is standing firm that it only needs to apply the relevant election laws and does not have to consider any of the provisions contained in the National Police Law. However, there are arguments being put forward that the National Police Law is lex spesialis and therefore trumps any general legislation. Therefore, the National Police Law must be applied because it regulates specific issues relating to serving police officers intending to seek elected office.

However, if the General Election Commission of Bali maintains its current position and interpretation of the prevailing and applicable legislation, then it appears that Pastika will continue to seek the office of Governor of Bali.