Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too am pleased to speak on this private member's motion by the member for Fowler and endorse the member for Hasluck's comments with respect to us urging the Vietnamese government to honour its obligations as a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In terms of the ongoing persecution of those that seek to exercise their rights in a democracy and being rightfully able to do so, the issue has been raised quite powerfully in this place and in other places by the member during his period of time as member for Fowler.

When one seeks to be recognised as a fully democratic nation, the actions of stymieing, stifling or quashing protests about your government or system of government lead parliaments from around the world to ask the question about that particular government. That is a very serious charge to make, but, unfortunately, given the number of representations that we have received collectively from all over Australia and particularly from the very large Vietnamese diaspora that lives in our community, makes a life in our community and has contributed so substantially to our community, it behoves us to continue to raise these ongoing abuses of human rights and seek to pressure the Vietnamese government. We suggest that there is a better way forward in managing protest than quashing it and dealing with it as they have been doing, particularly with the celebrated cases that have been raised, and which I will re-emphasise briefly here.

When you have 14 Vietnamese Catholics, who include the high-profile blogger Paulus Le Son and are basically sentenced to prison terms ranging from three to 13 years in what is called a 'subversion' case when they were merely protesting, then you have got to ask a question about the government of the country. The defendants were arrested in 2011 as a crackdown on Vietnamese youth activists who were accused of being critical of the Vietnamese government in calling for greater democracy and human rights, and that does not warrant jail sentences. A number of the defendants are members of Redemptorist group in the Roman Catholic Church, which has been engaged in community service and lobbying, and talking about land seizures and corruption. To see young Vietnamese being condemned and sentenced to jail for carrying out protests is very troubling in terms of not only a human rights trend but a trend that has been evident for some time in Vietnam.

One case that concerns many members of the local Vietnamese community in Holt—and one that I have mentioned, along with the member for Fowler—is the case of Nguyen Phuong Uyen and Dinh Nguyen Kha, who were charged under article 88. I have had representations from Mr Tien Dung Kieu, the president of Vietnamese TV on Channel 31. He came to speak to me and raised his concerns about human rights abuse and this one in particular. Whilst Mr Tien welcomes the decision by the appeals court in August 2013 to free 21-year-old Nguyen Phuong Uyen, who was serving a six-year jail term for alleged subversion, he is disappointed that Uyen's co-defendant, 25-year-old computer technician Dinh Nguyen Kah, was not released and has only had his eight-year sentence cut in half. Again, this is two young people exercising their democratic right and they are in prison.

The other incident that has been discussed in this place is the incident that occurred in February 2010 when labour activists Doan Huy Chuong, Do Thi Minh Hanh and Nguyen Haong Quoc Hung were detained for organising workers at a shoe factory. This was basically about circulating a demand for workers, who were on strike because of their company's arbitrary payment policies and manager's abusive behaviour. These people were put in prison. There are questions about the validity of the trial that was conducted because they were denied a lawyer and the Vietnamese government prevented them from speaking in their own defence during the proceedings. That is not a free and open court.

In the light of this particular hearing, Mr Doan and Ms Hanh were sentenced to seven years prison. Mr Hung was sentenced to nine years. What we are hearing from various representative organisations is that in prison they have been subjected to deplorable treatment. In addition to prolonged periods of solitary confinement they have each been repeatedly beaten. As a result, we understand that Ms Hahn is now deaf in one ear and Mr Doan has lost the use of one hand. All three suffer from rashes and liver problems, the result of poor food and sleeping conditions. That treatment is deplorable. No reasonable, responsible democratic government can undertake these actions. I again commend the member for Fowler for raising these issues of concern. We perhaps do have to look at the way in which our aid is provided if we are providing aid to a government that treats its citizens in such a deplorable manner.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context