Duncan Kerr (Denison, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Might I first acknowledge that all the contributors I have listened to in this debate have approached what is a terrible tragedy with great understanding of both its importance and the complexities that face Indonesia in dealing effectively with a multicultural and multifaith community forged together out of a variety of different islands previously under Dutch dominion. I think that tone of debate does this parliament great credit.

In relation to religious extremism, it is certainly possible to point to events such as the beheading of those three Christian girls—a terrible tragedy. It is possible to point to Afghanistan, where their courts are considering the death penalty for an apostate who has converted to Christianity. But we look only in one direction if we look towards extremism when it is manifested by persons of Islamic background. Look to India, where a Christian missionary was burnt hideously to death by Hindu extremists. Look to acts even in our recent times of extremists following odd and quite unacceptable brands of Christian faith—the ‘Lord’s soldiers’, I think they are called, in Africa, who have committed unspeakable atrocities using kids as young as seven and eight to carry guns, to kill their parents and to impose a reign of terror in that part of Africa where they have temporary dominion.

Look, too, to our not so distant past, where those carrying the cross brought to South America unimaginable horrors—enslavement and tragedy to the native South Americans. More recently and with less tragic consequences for the people of Papua was the very fact that Christian missions there were responsible for enormous cultural destruction—the destruction of longhouses and cultural evidence of any belief other than Christianity—as they arrived, which has contributed to the difficulties of that emerging nation as it struggles to deal with its own complexities.

Of course, Indonesia, as the member for Reid has quite properly mentioned, has made enormous strides, some with the assistance and cooperation of the Australian government. I know that Brian Burdekin, a former Commissioner for Human Rights in Australia, has had good and effective dialogue with his Indonesian counterparts. There are many in Australia and Indonesia who would share the kind of tone of discussion that is occurring today, notwithstanding the temptation to inflame debate that events such as the grant of asylum to those who left West Irian and came to Australia might give rise to in that other country.

I join with the member for Reid in his comments about the circumstances of that country. Our own behaviour in Papua was less than exemplary. Although in the end independence was granted, it came in circumstances of which Australia really cannot be proud. It was delayed for far too long and then pushed forward in haste. And since independence little attention has been paid to that country’s long-ongoing national integrity. There are real difficulties about the manner in which West Papua was incorporated into the Indonesian state—what many call ‘a so-called act of free choice’.

Nonetheless, both the government and Labor have made plain that they accept Indonesian sovereignty over that country. But that does not mean that we should not calmly, sensibly and with great dignity make a case for the internationalisation of human rights. If human rights matter, they must be universal and they must extend to all religions, to all persons and to all peoples. Of course, that means we do not turn blind eyes to circumstances where people come to this country in genuine fear of persecution, irrespective of the fact that we regard their country as indissoluble.

See this speech in context