Mr. President...

The abuse of Indonesia's migrant workers has been a problem from time immemorial. The reality is that Indonesia's migrant workers of the domestic servant kind are often thrown like lambs to the slaughter (for want of a better analogy) as they are under-skilled for the exploitation that they are about to be subject to. This has always had a high probability of ending badly for the migrant worker. Badly equates to, quite often, physical abuse at the hands of her employers, and sometimes worse.

The case of Sumiati has once again brought this very cold hard reality home.

Sadly, the President, SBY, has decided that a viable option is to equip all migrant workers with a mobile phone and a list of Embassy and Consulate numbers, presumably pre-loaded.

You really do not want to be searching for a business card while getting beaten to within an inch of your life. This is sad because the suggestion so obviously fails to see the reality that any domestic servant fronting up with a visible mobile phone of their own is likely to have it confiscated by the employer, particularly if the employer is the abusive and controlling kind.

Then again, the populist president knows his constituents are watching, so he has to say something.

I have always believed that there were large numbers of Indonesians heading to foreign locales as migrant workers. And, based on this the percentage that were subject violence was relatively small in number. I was not of the impression that there was a majority of migrant workers that were subject to violence. I will now do a little research and see if I can track down some statistics on the level of abuse.

So, it is within this understanding I wonder whether it is possible to eradicate all instances of violence? I am not suggesting that the Indonesian government throw up its hands and say that the numbers of victims considering the sheer numbers of migrant workers is acceptable.

To the contrary, perhaps a more comprehensive, and validated, pre-departure training program needs to be enforced to ensure that those Indonesians heading overseas to work, not only have the job skills necessary to complete their work contracts, but also have sufficient language skills and knowledge of what to do, where to go, and how to navigate the processes when things go wrong.

I have read stories of Indonesian families who lock their domestic servants inside the house when they go out. So, I do wonder how the Indonesian government plans to deal with a similar scenario if it was to occur in Saudi Arabia or Malaysia. I am not convinced that a mobile phone, in and of itself, is the answer.

Peterporn and Increasing Child Rape...

A celebrity sex tape and the world of Indonesia is falling apart at the seams, it seems! When it is all said and done what we have here is a celebrity sex tape. Nothing more, nothing less. What we also have is a celebrity sex tape which has already been watched by millions upon millions of 'law abiding and moral' Indonesian citizens. The rest of what we have is anecdotal and unsubstantiated theories of what the impact has been on Indonesian society and how it should be dealt with. Just about all of it over the top.

What is really disturbing is that much of the over the top stuff is being driven and flamed by the obvious pot stirrers such as the Islam Defenders' Front (FPI) and institutions such as the Child Protection Commission (KPAI). I do not know if I can say it enough times, all we have is a celebrity sex tape, two of them to be precise so far. That is it folks!

Now, the Chairman of the KPAI, Hadi Supeno, is of the firm opinion that Nazriel 'Ariel' Irham must apologise to all Indonesian children. This belief is based on an assertion that Peterpan has some 30 million fans and a great number of them are in their tweens. What is truly disturbing is the assertion that the sex tape has led to an increase kn reports of rape and sexual abuse involving children, both as perpetrators and as victims. The intent is clear because the above assertion is followed by a modifying statement that suggests this increase is post the release of the tapes.

To my knowledge, and I read widely and peruse Indonesian news 4 or 5 times a day, there have not been any rapes or sexual assaults where the claim was that the perpetrator was trying to copy the actions of Ariel. To make the link that there is some kind of direct correlation between the videos and increasing sexual assault reports is irresponsible in the extreme. Supeno seems more interested in acting in his own interests by making outrageous statements to get his name and mug in the papers and on TV than he does with the idea that the interests of the child should be paramount.

The apology, and the demand for it is a little premature. If the tapes / videos were stolen, then Ariel has been the victim of a crime. Since when has law enforcement been about punishing the victims of crime and not the perpetrators of those crimes? There is no guarantee that with a strict reading of the prevailing laws and regulations, especially the Porn Law, that Ariel has in fact broken the law by taping himself doing the deed with either Luna Maya or Cut Tari.

The idea of video taping yourself having sex is questionable in light of the fact that these things can get lost or stolen. The rest as hindsight shows us is history. There is no going back once the footage is out there. Should Ariel apologise for having sex? No. Should he apologise for video taping it? If he wants to. Should he apologise to the youth of Indonesia for the tape finding its way into the public forum? No. At most this should become a teaching moment where Ariel can talk directly to youth about the perils associated with his actions and how intent does not always matter in cases such as this one.

But not being one to let sleeping dogs lie, Supeno has fanned the flames even further by suggesting that even if Ariel does not want to apologise to the children of Indonesia, he should apologise to all Indonesians as a means of quietening down the hardliners such as those in the FPI. Supeno then goes on to equate any failure to apologise to the masses as being the trigger to violence. The Chairman is being truly irresponsible in suggesting that the failure to apologise is a legitimate trigger to violence.

The FPI have a pretty solid track record of violence. They do not need to be spurred on to further violence. Nevertheless, claims such as those put forward by Supeno and the KPAI will only serve to embolden those look for any reason to wreak havoc on the innocent. Emboldened as they now are, the FPI in Bandung is demanding that the local government revoke Ariel's identity card. Every Indonesian is required to hold an identity card. Is the suggestion that making a sex video is sufficient to extinguish your rights as a citizen. It seems that revoking his Bandung ID is not enough, the FPI would like the local government to ban Ariel from ever returning to Bandung. Over the top? Just a little!

At least the Home Affairs Minister, Gamawan Fauzi say the irrationality of demanding the revocation of Ariel's ID card by saying that there are no laws in place that would allow for the revocation of an Indonesian's ID card for making porn videos.

The kicker for me is that the FPI jumps up and down on the spot in between destroying public and private property in the name of Allah and Islam while simultaneously perpetrating violence against those who will not agree with them, and then say that Ariel has destroyed the moral fabric of Indonesia. There is something inherently wrong in the claim, the vast majority of Indonesians can see through the hypocrisy of that without blinking an eye.

Once again, I do not know if I can emphasize this enough, this is just a celebrity sex tape! The world is not ending, the sky is not falling in, and life will go on!

For those of you out there who think this is the end of the world as we know it, Get A Grip!

UN Peacekeepers and Sex Crimes...

It is too bad that national authorities have the prime responsibility for punishing their nationals who commit sex crimes whilst on active duty with the United Nations (UN). Too bad, because most national authorities fail to appreciate the seriousness of the offenses, quite often perpetrated against children, or there is just no desire to prosecute at the national level.

Nevertheless, at least 50 peacekeepers have been punished by their respective national authorities for sex crimes committed whilst in the service of the UN. The punishments have been somewhat on the light side with most seeing a reduction in rank and the most serious punishment being a stint of eight months in jail.

The UN released the data after repeated requests to do so. However, the UN did not publicize the identities or the nations of the perpetrators of these outrages against human dignity.

Unfortunately for the UN, the UN can investigate the alleged crimes and forward relevant data and information to the relevant national authority. However, it is the national authority that makes the determination to prosecute or not. The data shows that although prosecutions for sex crimes is increasing, there are still vast numbers of allegations that go untried.

Manohara Odelia Pinot -- Part XXIII -- Default Judgment

It has been a while between drinks, so to speak, when it comes to the Mano posts. However, apart from her self-titles soap getting canned, there has not been anything much newsworthy to post on. Nevertheless, patience pays off, and the girl is back in the news this week and in a bit of a lawyer-driven bind.

It is interesting to see that the press refers to Mano as an Indonesian teen soap star. I am not sure that one truncated, and ultimately cancelled, season warrants the description. Yet, as a teenager she still has time to become a star. However, Mano and her mum, Daisy Fajarina, are in a spot of bother. That bother is what is likely to be a 105 million ringgit default judgment against both Mano and her mother for defaming and slandering Mano's former husband, Tengku Fakhry, of the Kelantan royal family.

Mano and Daisy's previous legal representation have handed back the case files and bailed on the case. The Malaysian High Court has decided that Mano and Daisy have until 5 November to get new legal representation on board and complete the case or run the risk of the court handing down a default judgment. It would seem that Tengku Fakhry thinks he is on a winner no matter whether his former wife and mother-in-law get counsel or not, as he was supportive of a delay to allow Mano and Daisy to seek out new legal representatives.

Aside from the cash, the prince is also asking that the court hand down an injunction that prohibits both Mano and her mother from defaming him by constantly stating publicly that the prince sexually and physically abused Mano during their brief marriage. This mistreatment also included an allegation of abduction or kidnapping.

The best defense to an allegation of defamation or slander is truth. It would seem that with this case, the prince is asking both Mano and Daisy to ante up and prove the truth of their allegations or withdraw them and be penalized for making false claims.

It has been suggested that Mano has been paid well for her work on her short-lived soap opera, but I am not sure she was paid well enough to cover a default judgment of 105 million ringgit.

(Photo courtesy of here)

Manohara Odelia Pinot -- Part III

The more I read about the Manohara (photo courtesy of The Jakarta Globe) case the more interesting it becomes in that slowing down as one goes past a car crash kind of a way. The story has all the ingredients for a TV movie, perhaps even a series or soap opera. It seems that these things are all possible with Manohara receiving numerous offers from local production houses in Indonesia. There has even been a suggestion that she will play herself in any movie of her story.

If the allegations of rape, torture, and other abuse is true, I really cannot fathom why you would want to play yourself and relive the horror. But, then again it is not me so I don't really know what motivates either Manohara or her mother, who seems to enjoy being in the spotlight. Although, reports suggest that Manohara is keen to continue her education in a business related field. Good luck to her on that front.

I strongly believe that an education is important. Let's face it, if your entertainment career does not pan out then at least you have other skills on which to fall back on to make ends meet.

No matter what happens, it would appear that Manohara is going to convert her new found fame as a result of her alleged trauma into an entertainment career, according to her mother they are still sifting through the offers and will ultimately choose one of them. Good luck to them both on that front as well.

Manohara's father is an American and her step-father is a Frenchman. Not too drama filled on that front. However, there is drama outside of Manohara's alleged abuse. The drama revolves around her mother, Daisy Fajarina, who it is alleged is subject to an Interpol warrant for her arrest relating to the abuse of a maid while she was living in France. It is being suggested that the reason Manohara and her mother fled France was not only the divorce of Daisy and her French husband, but the pending arrest.

If this is true, and there is a red notice with Interpol for her arrest then it does not make any sense for Daisy to be leaving the country. Also of interest is that the Malaysian authorities apparently know about this red notice. So, I would have figured they would have arrested her had she turned up on their shores.

Daisy would seem to be pretty safe in Indonesia as there is no extradition treaty between Indonesia and France. Nevertheless, the French want her for trial and I have no doubt would have broached the subject with their Indonesian counterparts both in Jakarta and Paris.

Somewhat ironic that Daisy is so vocal about her daughter being allegedly abused but not having too many problems about abusing others (allegedly).

The plot thickens.

The Catholic Church and Abortion -- Brazil

The right of women to choose in the case of abortion must be absolute. I can appreciate that nothing is ever absolute, but any restrictions placed on access to abortion must be limited to clearly identifiable objective terms. I am sure there are plenty of people that disagree with this position and I am sure that some of my readers will disagree with me on this as well. One and all feel free to voice your opinions.

A couple of cases out of Brazil have shown that absolutes seem to work from both perspectives of this little argument. The Catholic Church of Brazil under the leadership of Father Jose Cardoso Sobrinho in the Recife region where the abortion was carried out has stated that abortion is against God's law and even where other law may permit abortion, God's law must prevail. The argument being, nothing can be higher than God's law, and where human laws are contrary to God's law then human laws have no value.

I am happy for the good father to have an opinion on this and to argue for it passionately. However, if there was ever a case for the Catholic Church to take a somewhat more moderate view on the issue, then this would be the time.

A nine-year-old girl that had been continuously raped by her step-father eventually fell pregnant with twins. I am guessing that carrying twins to term as an adult is a challenge, but at nine-years-old, life-threatening might be a more apt word?

The stepfather is 23-years-old, has been arrested, and is in protective custody. Protective custody is probably a good thing for him, as rapists of children are likely to become victims of rape themselves when put into the general prison population. Some might argue that this is still better than what they deserve for the crimes they have committed.

It is worth noting that abortion is illegal in Brazil. Nevertheless, there are specific exceptions to this absoluteness where there are clearly identifiable reasons such as where rape was involved or the health of the woman is in jeopardy.

However, in this case the Church's response has been to excommunicate all those involved in the abortion procedure.

I am not Catholic so perhaps I should not concern myself with all or any things Catholic. However, as a mere mortal man with an interest in humanity and the protection of those less fortunate than myself, I cannot reconcile an absolute stance adopted by the Church and the rights of the child in this case, arguments on abortion aside.

The sad part is that this is not the only case in Brazil that is getting news coverage. Another prominent case involves an 11-year-old who is seven months pregnant after being abused by her 51-year-old stepfather. The stepfather's defense is that it was the girl who initiated the sexual contact and not him.

Child sexual abuse is not only a Brazilian problem, it is a world-wide problem!

Child Brides -- Indonesia

There are plenty of ways to get media attention in Indonesia. One of the best is to publicly announce you have married a 12-year-old and intend to take a 9-year-old and a 7-year-old in the near future as wives.

In most places this would be serial pedophilia and the perpetrator would be investigated and prosecuted and hopefully jailed.

It should be noted that this is not an attack on Indonesia alone. I have written about the child bride practice in Yemen here. You can find other commentary here.

There are many urging the police to take immediate action in terms of investigating the cleric, Pujiono Cahyo Widianto (AKA Syekh Puji), for breaches of the Child Protection Law, the Marriage Law, the Labor Law, and most obviously the Criminal Code.

The Child Protection Law states that the parents of a child cannot marry them off until the child has reached at least 18 years of age. The Marriage Law sets an age of 16 with the parents consent. The breach of the Labor law relates to the allegation that Puji has made his new bride, Lutfiana Ulfa, a Managing Director (or something similar) in one of his companies. The Criminal Code prohibits sexual contact with minors.

There would seem to be some inconsistency between the Child Protection Law and the Marriage Law in terms of age. This is potentially a Constitutional Court issue in terms of determining which age is the appropriate age.

In terms of the Marriage Law individually. The Marriage Law recognizes marriages know as kawin siri. This type of marriage is one that is valid under one's religion. If this particular marriage is a kawin siri one then this raises a whole range of issues that warrant a much longer debate and post than I intend to make here.

However, suffice to say, if the parents provide their permission for the marriage to take place, the parents are of sound mind and body, then should the state be in a position to take their parenting rights away?

It would seem that there is much more to this story than a simple run of the mill kawin siri. I am sure that the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia / KPAI), who have sent a team to investigate, will produce a report that will enlighten us a little further as to what transpired in this case.

Claims of child exploitation are interesting as the parents seemed to have agreed. If there was a transaction involved, a dowry for instance, would this be consistent with child trafficking? Just throwing that out there.

It seems the Syekh's reasons for marrying are varied but primary among these is his self-proclaimed penchant for liking little girls. The reason is that he can "educate" them to become great people. Maybe this is true.

However, he does not need to marry them to educate them and make them great people. He could just as easily facilitate their education through university, ensure that their parents have sufficient resources to provide a good home and good nutrition. The Syekh obviously has the resources to do this as he recently disbursed some IDR 1.2 billion as alms this past Eid.

Nah, I think it has more to do with that he enjoys having sex with children. He has chosen to dress this up as something that is permissible under his religion and it is so because the prophet did it. It is amusing in a really sad way that the Syekh equates himself to the prophet and that he thinks that the times have not changed.

This is not a justification for the prophet's actions rather a statement as to what may or may not have been acceptable then is not acceptable now. However, "acceptable" is relative and there are some who do not have a problem with what the Syekh has done or is planning to do. One of these people who does not have a problem with it is a member of parliament and a representative of the Prosperous Justice Party or PKS.

The Chair of the Indonesia Ulemas Council (MUI), Umar Shihab, has come out and said he is troubled by the marriage. His troubles are not an outright condemnation of the marriage. His statements go along the lines of he cannot see why the Syekh needs to marry a 12-year-old when there are so many older women available for marriage. Shihab then goes on to suggest that it is important that the reasons for the marriage be made clear and that it is OK to marry in order to protect yourself from sin.

This is most certainly not the required condemnation for the sexual exploitation of children that the MUI needs to be putting out there into the public sphere. It seems that the biggest hurdle is that some just cannot reconcile that the actions of the prophet some 1400 years ago no longer the way of the 21st Century.

Those that support this will never get past. "well the prophet married Aisha when she was just a child", which is simply an argument, "if it was good enough for the prophet then it must be good enough for us". A silly argument that seems more like a call to rationalize and justify modern day pedophilia than it is to protect some kind of sacred institution or practice.

In a cynical and sarcastic way it is too bad for followers of other religions that their prophets or founders chose not to take child brides. Then we could simply run away from the fact that we have men sexually exploiting children and hide behind some religious excuse that it is OK. It is not OK and it is time the practice was explicitly forbidden.

It is time for Muslim scholars to state unequivocally that the actions of Muhammad had their time and place back then but there is no justification for actions such as the practice of taking child brides in the 21st Century. The MUI could lead the charge on this in Indonesia.

For me there are lots of issues.

Simply, girls are not ready to become wives and are not prepared mentally, emotionally, or physically for being married. According to most reports, Ulfa has already menstruated and if the Syekh is as good as his religious word then this means that he has already slept with her. I just cannot bring my mind to the idea that a 12-year-old is in any way ready to become a parent herself. I know some 30-year-olds that are not ready for the challenge.

The second issue runs on from the first in a sense that being married at 12 rips away any normalcy of childhood. If you take a step back and think for a minute of two about your childhood, good or bad, this is the time that you develop, you grow, and you have fun with your peers, it is where you start to gain your life experiences that make you what you are as an adult. For Ulfa it would seem that her childhood or teenage years are destined to be a revolving door of pregnancies and isolation from her peers.

Let's face it, you do not usually see married and pregnant girls in year 7 or 8 of high school.

When push comes to shove, if this marriage has in fact taken place, then this marriage should be rejected and rejected with prejudice. The man should be investigated, prosecuted, and jailed for the sexual abuse of a minor. This can happen even without the MUI and others having the testicular fortitude to come out and openly say this is wrong no matter the circumstances proclaimed as being justification are.

Whether law enforcement is endowed with the courage to make a statement on the application of the rule of law in Indonesia by seeing this individual is punished for all breaches of the prevailing laws and regulations remains to be seen.

Being the eternal optimist then I will always remain hopeful that this person will be punished for his crimes.

Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church -- An Apology

I have been contemplating writing something on this for some time and have hesitated because the issue deserves more than just passing comment. I have not done the research on the statistics of the prevalence of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, although I am sure others may have numbers, names, locations, and the like. Yet, perhaps if there was more open and frank discussion on issues such as these then progress towards a workable resolution might be quicker in coming.

The Pope, Benedict XVI, was alleged to have said on his way to Australia for the World Youth Day festivities that he was going to apologize to all those who have suffered sexual abuse at the hands of clergymen over the years. This blanket apology might not mean much but it would have meant that the Church acknowledges and has remorse for what has happened but is genuinely sorry for the tragedy that it has allowed to occur. This profound sorrow might not pay the bills of the victims or bring back loved ones who have committed suicide as a result of not being able to cope any longer with the pain, but it would say that even though we can never fully make amends for what has happened "we" accept responsibility.

Unfortunately, the Pope's point man on media communications has spent much of the day backtracking on whether an apology will be forthcoming and has even indicated that this might be one of those lost in translation moments, where what the Pope is alleged to have said might not actually be what he said.

Father Federico Lombardi, Director of the Vatican Press Office, has been saying that there is no papal commitment to making an apology and perhaps what Australian victims should be expecting is the Pope making brief mention of the "issue" in a statement. Stupid! This would seem to be the perfect moment to capitalize on the good will of Australians during WYD to make the apology.

It would seem that the Pope has not been pontificating on the issue and is on the record as saying that the Church needs to examine how it is going to, "prevent, heal and reconcile" the past crimes of the clergy. The Pope then went further in terms of putting this into context with, "this is the essential content of what we will say as we apologise."

Father Lombardi seems to think that any apology would be limited to a meeting with church officials and novices. This is the same means that was adopted by the Pope when apologizing during his visit to the US. This is a cop out! He does not need to apologize to the members of the clergy and the novices of the Church. He needs to apologize to the victims of the crimes perpetrated by the clergy on children for decades past.

Why is an apology necessary? The answer to this question is simple and is best done through an Australian example of the tragedy the sexual abuse of children has wreaked on one particular family. Their story is a sad and tragic one that has been played out in many thousands of families across the globe.

The Foster family was by all accounts a happy one. However, this changed tragically for the worst when Emma and Katherine Foster were raped by Father Kevin O'Donnell when they were in primary school. The Catholic Church does not seem to have a very good record in weeding out those applicants that have a penchant for young children.

Emma committed suicide at the age of 26. Katherine developed an alcohol abuse problem and this led to her being struck by a car driven by a drunk driver. Katherine now requires 24-hour care as a result of the physical and brain injuries that she sustained.

In reference to this sad tale the Bishop Anthony Fisher in his infinite wisdom expressed the following sentiment, "Happily, I think most of Australia was enjoying delighting in the beauty and goodness of these young people and the hope - the hope for us doing these sorts of things better in the future - as we saw last night, rather than, than dwelling crankily, as a few people are doing, on old wounds."

Bishop Fisher, you are a fool! These are not old wounds to those directly affected by them! These wounds are open and festering sores that are slowly but surely eating away at the very life essence of the victims of these abhorrent crimes. It is time the Catholic Church ante-ed up and faced the fact that it is responsible as the employer of predators like Father O'Donnell.

Priests like father O'Donnell when they are found guilty of the crimes they have committed they should be sent to prison. They should not be put into the protective wing of the prison. These brave souls that pray on children must be put into the general prison population where it should be known that they like to have their way with children. You should not be surprised that prisoners have families and they have children and that the mere thought of someone sexually violating their children is enough to ensure that the Father O'Donnells of this world get a firsthand understanding of what it is like to be violated. This would give a new meaning to "get what's coming to you"!

The Catholic Church has to start making amends in Australia. This can start with a full, open, and frank apology to victims. Then, I personally do not care if this means the Catholic Church has to sell off all its assets or mortgage its properties to the hilt, but it must pay compensation to victims for the harm these victims have suffered at the hands of the employees of the Church.

Thus endeth my rant (or is it a sermon?) on this subject.

Women as Sexual Predators

It is most often the case if one was to start a discussion about sexual predators that the focus would be on men. However, it is not a case that only men are sexual predators but women prey on children sexually as well. The question is do we hold women to a different standard when it comes to sex crimes involving minors than the standard we hold men?

A story out of Pennsylvania in the US has shocked a suburban community where the alleged offences occurred. Two single mothers, on of who has two children of her own, have been charged with offences including statutory sexual assault, unlawful contact with a minor, corruption of minors, and the endangerment of a child, among other offences.

The story goes that one of the women, Lynne Long, was holding a slumber party at her home where the invitees were boys between the ages of 14 and 16. The other woman, Angela Honeycutt, is alleged to have had sex with a 14-year old and performed sex acts on a 15-year old. It is also alleged that Honeycutt showed her breasts, did some French kissing, talked dirty to the boys, and showered with another. The allegations against Long are that she listened in on the assaults and she watched the assaults occur. It is further alleged that Long told the boys not to say anything. In the above photo, Honeycutt is on the left and Long is on the right.

The crimes came to light when one of the boys told his parents the lurid details of the evening's activities.

Both women are now back in the community after having been released on bail.

The question is this, if these allegations were against two men having perpetrated these crimes against girls of the same age would they have been granted bail?

The other question is this, if we are serious about protecting our children from harm and sexual predators, then should people alleged to have committed such sexually predatory crimes be granted bail?

Sorry for What?

It was not so long ago that the Australian Prime Minister stood before an expectant and silent crowd and uttered a word that many had longed to here, SORRY!

Yet a couple of months on the horrors that afflict our indigenous communities continue unabated and despite a last ditch intervention totalling some AUD 1.5 billion.

This is truly one of those WTF moments! Saying sorry is and was the easy part! Now it is time for the hard yards to be hoed and if we as a community are not prepared to do that then the uttering of an empty sorry should and must be derided for what it is a political gesture without the necessary testicular fortitude to make it real or to make it meaningful.

A story in The Sydney Morning Herald caught my eye for a number of reasons. Where is the 1.5 billion dollars going to? What was the government sorry for? And why isn't anyone doing anything about this.

The title of the news piece:

"Sordid sex trade thrives after $1.5b intervention"

And the opening couple of paragraphs go like this:

"ABORIGINAL girls as young as 13 have been given cash, drugs, alcohol and taxi rides in exchange for sex in the Northern Territory mining town of Nhulunbuy.

Indigenous elders have asked police to investigate a group of non-indigenous men in the town who they say have been sexually abusing Aboriginal teenagers for years.


A group of four young indigenous women gave the Herald details of abuse by men they were prepared to identify to police. They said at least three Aboriginal girls were sexually abused at the age of 13."

The "culture of silence" has to end! The sexual abuse of children (and adults) is wrong, plain and simple!

If we, as a community, are truly sorry then we cannot stand for this kind of treatment and abuse any longer in any community...