Martin Stephens, Kerobokan And A Wedding...

A life sentence for drug smuggling should not be a hindrance to true love and I guess this is the case for Martin Stephens of Bali Nine fame (or is that infamy?). Stephens has decided that now that all his appeals have been exhausted for his sentence to be reduced to a set term that it is a good time to get married. The reality for Stephens and his new bride, Christine Winarni Puspayanti, is that unless the current president or a future president of the Republic of Indonesia sees fit to commute his sentence to a fixed term then Stephens is not likely to see the outside of Kerobokan prison.

Stephens and his new bride are optimistic that freedom awaits Stephens at some point in the future. The Chief Warden of Kerobokan, Siswanto, allowed the wedding to go ahead because Stephens has been a well-behaved, or model, prisoner. Siswanto was in such a good mood that he allowed one of the cells to be converted into a honeymoon suite in which the prisoner and his new bride were permitted to partake in a conjugal visit.

True love seemingly cannot be thwarted on any count. So, to Stephens and Puspayanti, good luck! May your marriage be a long and fruitful one.

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.

Drugs in Indonesia...

When will foreigners (and some Indonesians) learn? Drug related offenses are considered to be serious criminal offenses that attract harsh penalties. You are not in your country of origin and the standards you might expect may not be available to you. The slap on the wrist you might feel you are entitled to is not likely to be forthcoming just because you are a foreigner.

Three foreign students, and two of their Indonesian friends, were arrested in Bali for marijuana and hashish possession. They are now facing the prospect of four years in the slammer. If played right, they are likely to do 5 - 7 months as drug addicts, and this is likely to be time served as their individual cases are more than likely to play out over 5 months or so.

The urine tests were positive for drugs. Assuming these positive tests related to THC then the appointed lawyers might decide the best course of action is to plead addiction.

Not everything is a stitch-up designed to shake-down the innocent for cash!

The happy snappy is supposedly of law enforcement burning the marijuana and the heroin that sent Schapelle Corby and the Bali Nine to long-term jail sentences and death sentences (for some).

Interpol, Drug Trafficking Networks, and the Bali Nine

The Bali Nine case has taken an interesting turn. However, this turn, no matter how interesting, is not going to impact on the sentences already handed down on the Bali Nine. The alleged drug trafficking network, which has seen Interpol team up with the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the United States Drug Enforcement Agency to investigate the drug trade in Surabaya as this is the supposed entry point for heroin and other illicit drugs.

This is interesting because the AFP should have known about this considering they claimed to have broken a major drug trafficking ring at the time they gave up the Bali Nine to the Indonesian Police.

The cooperation will obviously include the Indonesian Police and more specifically the narcotics division. It seems though that this is a new development as it is being discussed as a recent discovery.

Strangely enough with the number of local drug busts and the increasing size of these busts it is hardly surprising that there is now a belief that major cartels and international drug organizations operate in an through the Republic of Indonesia. I guess the death penalty is not the deterrent that some claim it to be.

Bali Nine, Death Penalty, Appeals, and the Supreme Court

In a turn of events which is likely to see a call for the death penalty process to be sped up against Andrew Chan, Myuran Sukumaran, and Scott Rush, the three members of the Bali Nine sentenced to death and biding their time in Kerobokan prison, the Supreme Court has prepared a document that clearly puts the timing of appeals and ultimate executions squarely in the hands of prosecutors.

This is interesting timing for a number of reasons, none more so than this is an election year, and this is clearly an emotionally charged issue, with divergent views on the death penalty in general. However, in this case there is the added factor that the current president has adopted a hard line approach to drugs and those that deal in them. Therefore, to say the prospects of a reprieve for these three has taken a dive would be an understatement.

I am anti-death penalty and would hope that the president would exercise compassion once all other legal avenues have been exhausted and only a presidential act of clemency remains. I would hope that the sentence would be commuted to life in prison. The reality is that Australians, and all others as well, must realize that the trafficking of drugs in Indonesia exposes you to the death penalty. This is not Australian where you might do a 7 - 10 year stretch in jail for the equivalent crime.

You do the crime, then you deserve to do the time. I just think that in this case, and despite the seriousness of the crime, the death penalty is too severe a punishment. People will undoubtedly disagree with me on this, and you are free to do so, I believe in second chances in circumstances such as these, particularly in Rush's case where he has confessed to his role and expressed remorse at his actions. In this case, rehabilitation is a very real possibility. Here is a young kid who could conceivably still make very long and positive contributions to his community.

Unfortunately, the signs are looking bad for these three as the process in drafting the document and the discussion of it has seen them mentioned specifically as individuals that the new provisions are most likely to affect. Ultimately, these three are to become pawns in the Indonesian - Australian bilateral relationship and presidential politics.

Simple message - Drugs and Indonesia do not mix (particularly through airports).

Hypocrisy?

The Australian Labor Party is against the death penalty. This is not one of the reasons or a factor in the reasons that I vote for the Labor party. I have traditionally voted Labor as the party of those of us workers struggling to make ends meet. Stupid, maybe! The coming to power of the Rudd Labor government is likely to test those core beliefs that I hold in Labor representing the socialist democratic ideals that I hold.

That said, this is really a post about the hypocrisy of the Labor party with respect to its position on the death penalty. Stephen Smith, the Foreign Minister of Australia, is going to be making representations to the Indonesian Foreign Minister, Hassan Wirajuda, about the Bali Nine. These representations are in fact a plea for clemency. This is merely a case of public relations where the government can later claim that it has done everything it possible can to save them from the firing squad.

The hypocrisy here is that the Labor party is against the death penalty but it is not going to be making any representations with respect to the Bali Bombers who are also on death row. I have written about the Bali Bombers in this blog a number of times (if you're interested search "Bali Bombers").

My view is that I am against the death penalty and my preferred option for Amrozi, Samudra, and Mukhlas is that these murders rot in jail for the terms of their natural life. However, as they have been sentenced to death, then so be it! These killers are being afforded opportunities to appeal their sentences that in theory others might also have enjoyed but were never afforded the same opportunities to exercise.

The difficulty here is that most Australians would, and should, be aware and also understand that if you traffic or smuggle drugs into or out of Indonesia and you are caught in Indonesia then you are in trouble. Up the proverbial creek without a paddle, so to speak. The death penalty applies; no ifs, no buts, and no maybes. If you play Russian Roulette and get caught, you die! You take the risk then you know what the consequences are.

The simple reality here is that Australia could much more easily adopt the high moral ground here if it was uniformly against the death penalty no matter who the convicted persons are. This would include the Bali Bombers.

The warm fuzzy feeling that one might get when they know that the Australian government is making representations on their behalf quickly evaporates when the cold hard reality sets in that these representations equate to nothing more than the government saying the same crime in Australia would not be subject to the death penalty. These representations might just be more effective if Australia was serious in its opposition to the death penalty and not just paying lip service to the issue.

The idea that Australia is vocal in its opposition to the Iranian government's policy of executing children need not be cited as some form of achievement. State sanctioned murder is abhorrent at any time and the fact that this punishment is meted out on children is particularly abhorrent. Th need to oppose it goes without saying.

Australia needs to step up to the plate and make clear that it opposes the death penalty on all crimes. Australia can still respect the sovereignty of Indonesia as a State without having to accept the death penalty. I know the international legal arguments that can be made here with respect to States that are already imposing the death penalty have a right to continue to do so. Nevertheless, a representation from a government that is universal in its condemnation of the death penalty will always be more effective than those representations coming from a government that wavers on the issue.

Prisoner Transfers - Australia & Indonesia

The most prominent Australians likely to benefit from any prisoner transfer / exchange deal hammered out between the Australian and Indonesian governments will be Schapelle Corby and the members of the Bali Nine that were not sentenced to death (Martin Stephens, Michael Czugaj, and Renae Lawrence).

For the Indonesian side, I do not recall any 'big name' prisoners sitting in Australian jails. They are probably big names in their local villages and to their respective families. But of late most Indonesians violating Australian laws tend to be Indonesian fisherman operating in Australian territorial waters.

Illegal immigrants are not technically jailed but rather detained until all their legal avenues are exhausted then they are usually deported. It is worth noting that some, perhaps many, would consider conditions in an Australian detention facility like being in jail.

The question though is a simple one: If you are an Australian doing time in an Indonesian prison is it in your best interests to seek repatriation to Australia to serve the remainder of your sentence in an Australian jail?

If 20 years imprisonment in theory means 20 years imprisonment in practice. Then a convict like Schapelle Corby will be compelled to complete a full 20-year term in an Australian jail. Indonesian sentences do not generally contain a minimum period or a non-parole period. Simply, when the judge says 20 he means 20! So, even after 15 years Corby could not apply for parole nor could she rely on any kind of remission for good behaviour or otherwise.

On the plus side, conditions might be slightly better in practice and probably a whole lot cleaner! And she would also be closer to her family and the financial burden on them to visit will be greatly reduced.

In contrast, if Corby were to continue to serve her sentence in Indonesia where the system allows for remissions to be handed out, and sometimes handed out twice a year, she could conceivably serve a whole lot less time.

Tommy Soeharto is a classic example of how the remissions system can work in the favour of a convict. It also highlights the distorted and misguided nature of Indonesian law. But anyway, Tommy gets 15 years for the assassination murder of a Supreme Court judge (Corby gets 20 years for drug possession and smuggling - distorted) but serves only about half the time courtesy of remissions and other health related factors. So, if Corby plays her cards right she could conceivably do a whole lot less time in an Indonesian prison that she might if the 20 means 20 in Australia!

Unless, of course the convicts, although serving their prison time in Australia, can still be granted remissions by the Indonesia government and have them applied to the sentences being served in Australia. Then the decision to access the prisoner transfer program would be a 'no brainer'.

Now, things do not always go to plan and Corby missed out on the last round of remissions for supposedly being in possession of a mobile phone. This in itself hardly seems to be an additional crime worthy of that kind of punishment. Yet, in the light of that remission cancellation some jails now have installed public phones, which can be more easily monitored. But there are no hard and fast rules in that sense with regard to remissions that what you might lose on the swing you will probably make up on the merry-go-round!

Yet, for Corby and her Bali Nine friends that may benefit from this agreement it is still a wait and see game as not all the appeals processes have been exhausted. Generally, the agreement would only kick in after there were no further avenues of address and the sentence was in effect 'final and binding'...

Nevertheless, there are some interesting choices to be made by Australians in Indonesian prisons going forward.