Our little office had an afternoon tea last Friday to bid someone farewell. This lawyer had resigned for medical reason and it was her last day. Actually the office needed only a small excuse to have afternoon tea – I’ve had easily half a dozen in my short 2 months plus here so far. This time however, some wine was served and I hope this little fact could be stretched to account for what was said. The Schapelle Corby verdict had just been announced over the radio earlier that afternoon. My respectable, even (often) judicious boss expressed his disappointment with the result, and said she would never have been convicted by an Australian court. It would not have even gone to trial. I could only agree a little, as it would seem there were enough breaks in possession of her luggage to create doubt of some kind. For a long period of time, she simply did not have exclusive control over her luggage. Of course, I like thousands of Australians around me, simply did not know the facts enough, which was why I could only agree on a very hypothetical basis. He thought parents should encourage their children to boycott Bali. My surprise over my boss’s remark lies in the fact that he seemed so ready to firstly, assume the rules of the Australian legal system should apply in Indonesia and secondly, arrive at a conclusion without more knowledge of the facts. Maybe it was his passion for young people, having three young children himself, all near Ms Corby’s age, all of whom could easily fall into the same predicament. It then hit me how prevalent my boss’s sentiments probably were. Judging from the media coverage especially the phone calls to radio programs, it should have been evident to me how a great majority of Australians thought and felt exactly like my boss where the Corby case was concerned. This morning when I watched the morning news, it confirmed my suspicions as more reported calls to boycott Bali were aired. I guess Australians suffer from superiority complex somewhat. I recall the Kevin Barlow and Brian Chambers case in Malaysia in the early 80’s. I recall how the Australian press called the Malaysian system “barbaric”. This is where Australians are similar to Americans. They tend to think their standards are up there, right on and should be applied by everyone else. I too believe their standards are up there, but that is where I stop. I don’t go on and say everyone else should have the same standards and if they don’t, they are inferior.

 

When I read the NST editorial of today however, I had to laugh a little at some of the things it said. Here’s the piece:

 

Schapelle Corby case: The disturbing rise of people power

The New Straits Times, Kuala Lumpur

30 May 2005

EDITORIAL: The Corby controversy

May 30:

THE mother of convicted Australian drug smuggler Schapelle Corby believes that "people power is the best hope to free her". While it remains to be seen whether the court of Australian opinion, which has overwhelmingly found her innocent, will be able to overthrow the guilty verdict pronounced by the Bali District Court, the Corby case illustrates a disturbing tendency of populist sentiment to ride roughshod over established judicial processes or accepted principles in international relations. Though it is understandable for Australians to feel strongly about the predicament of one of their own stuck in a life-and-death situation in a foreign country, the public outrage has not only been astounding in its intensity but also shocking in the glimpses it has revealed of the depths of racism and xenophobia.

Sympathy and support should never overwhelm respect for the Indonesian verdict and the process of appeals. Hurling racist slurs at the Indonesian judiciary and casting aspersions on its integrity simply because the Bali court has not endorsed the popular Australian belief in her innocence is unacceptable.

While it is one thing to raise funds and run campaigns of every kind to support her, it is another thing to boycott Indonesian products and holiday destinations, or to ask for the return of donations to the tsunami relief fund. Since this was the same court whose verdict against the Bali bombers less than two years ago was well-received by Australians, by no stretch of the imagination could it be considered a kangaroo court without proper legal process. Moreover, Corby could consider herself quite fortunate not to have been handed a life sentence or even the death penalty instead of 20 years in prison.

"People power" is also making itself felt in the tremendous public pressure on the Australian Government. Prime Minister John Howard has had to soothe doubts that it has done little to help. There are now attempts to expedite negotiations on a prisoner exchange agreement and there is talk of the possibility of seeking a presidential pardon.

Canberra will also provide two senior lawyers to assist in the appeal as well as raise funds. While it is well within its responsibility to offer support to Australian citizens in legal and financial distress, perhaps it would do well to take a leaf from the Malaysian Foreign Ministry’s view that it will not interfere with the Australian judicial process in the case of a Malaysian woman awaiting trial on charges of smuggling opium into Australia.

While the political reality is that the Australian Government will have to take cognizance of the unequivocal public feeling by doing all it can, it should refrain from the kind of political actions that would strain bilateral ties with Indonesia. It would be a pity if the goodwill generated by the tsunami disaster is dissipated by the bitterness being spawned by the Corby case.

####

Have to leave it to later, to comment on some of what it said…