Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) on 15 February 2012, Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, called for a genuine, all-inclusive and meaningful dialogue that meets the legitimate aspirations of all Bahrainis as the only way to promote peace and stability in the country, and noted the harsh sentences given to 21 political activists, human rights defenders and opposition leaders;

(b) on 23 November 2011, His Majesty Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa announced his acceptance of a report from the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry headed by Professor M. Cherif Bassiouni where, systematic violation of basic human rights were established;

(c) major international human rights organisations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First and Physicians for Human Rights expressed their disappointment that the Bahraini regime did not stop the ongoing violation nor stop the impunity given to senior officials responsible, and the United States and European governments are calling for the regime to apply real political reform; and

(d) on 21 December 2011, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Navanethem Pillay, released a call to Bahraini authorities to address the ‘deepening mistrust’ between the Bahraini Government and civil society, advocating the release of people detained for participating in peaceful protests and calling for confidence-building measures, including unconditionally releasing those convicted in military tribunals awaiting trial for merely exercising their fundamental rights to freedom of expression and assembly, also stating that Bahrain trials bear marks of ‘political persecution’; and

(2) calls on the Australian Government to raise these human rights abuses in international fora.

In early April I met a former member of the Bahrain parliament, Matar Ebrahim, Dr Nabeel Hameed and members of the Bahraini-Australian Youth Movement. When there were other events in Bahrain, in what they call the 'April Spring', they received resounding international coverage of support. However, perhaps because the population of Bahrain is 66 to 77 per cent Shia, in a country ruled by the Al Khalifa royal family, who are Sunnis, and because Saudi Arabia might be disturbed by any change within Bahrain, there has been a degree of quiescence at what has occurred.

In February 2011 there was a day of rage associated with other events in the Middle East and, on 17 February, there was a storming of the Bahrain pearl roundabout, which had been the main focus of demonstrations. In March the Saudi Arabian and United Arab Emirates forces invaded Bahrain at the behest of the royal family. One of the manipulations by the royal family and their supporters has been the allegation that the Iranians are behind these demonstrations. The United States administration has systematically denied that. Realistically, in the early part of these struggles, there was a clear pro-secular position taken by demonstrators. However, when you suppress people, on many occasions you get a reaction. Ian Black, in the Guardian, of 27 April, noted:

… reforms have so far been negligible, so the grievances that exploded last year have festered and worsened in an atmosphere of political polarisation in which hardliners in government and the opposition are now setting the pace.

So the more moderate, the more secular, have been marginalised by the government's firm opposition to any relevant change. The suppression has been characterised by 87 deaths. They are shooting at people at funerals. There has been oppression of doctors who assisted the victims of shootings; jailings; and deaths in jail, supposedly while being restrained or as a result of heart attacks et cetera.

Interestingly, at the recent Universal Periodic Review hearings in Geneva, a number of countries voiced their position on Bahrain. The United States said that it:

… was concerned that several of the Commission’s most important recommendations had not been implemented.

It was referring to an independent commission that was forced upon the government. It also talked about the failure to investigate deaths. The United Kingdom said that it was:

… deeply concerned by reports of human rights violations that continue to occur.

Australia stated that it:

… remained concerned by reports of human rights violations against peaceful protestors and would like to see prisoners have access to lawyers …

Unfortunately for Bahrain, it houses the US 5th Fleet and, as I say, has Saudi Arabia as a neighbour. Saudi Arabia itself is of course infamous for a variety of activities, including very trenchant suppression of its own Shia minority, the Wahabis.

Ashara, the main Shia celebration each year, is severely suppressed. It is quite inappropriate that Saudi Arabia should be allowed by the world to interfere with this nation. What people have been seeking is democratic reform. As I said, at the start of this process there was no allegation by any party, including Israel and the United States, that there was an Iranian involvement. Yet this regime has slogans: 'Down, down with the Iranian conspiracy' in an attempt to provide an image that the issue at hand was Iranian interference.

The latest turn of events has seen Saudi Arabia promoting a political federation with Bahrain, which is essentially shorthand for 'Saudi Arabian control of the regime'.

A number of people have been on hunger strikes, including Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, the founder and former president of the Bahrain Centre of Human Rights, who lost 25 per cent of his weight in a three-month hunger strike. Recently it has been conceded that he would have a civil rather than a military trial. Zainab al-Khawaja, was jailed for 'insulting female police officers'.

Nabeel Rajab, of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, was involved in 'an illegal gathering in March'. As I say, we are seeing severe oppression, with the collaboration of the Saudi Arabian regime. (Time expired)

John Murphy (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is the first time that I have spoken in parliament on matters to do with Bahrain, although it is certainly not the first time that I have spoken on matters concerning human rights. What I have learnt in my almost 48 years is that nothing is black and white in this world and that, when we consider politics in the Middle East, that is most certainly the case. As the so-called Arab Spring uprisings demonstrated, hopes for liberal democracies in the region are somewhat forlorn. I suspect that when the dust settles in so many of these nations there will be increasingly Islamist sectarian regimes that are legitimised by elections but are not what we would call democracies. A democracy should guarantee freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion and the equality of the sexes. I am not sure that this will be the case in any of these countries that have seen revolution or changes of political systems.

Although I would like to see secular democracies throughout the Middle East, I believe that it is highly unlikely that this will happen. The reality is that there are deep complications standing in the way of such an eventuality. As I understand it, some 70 per cent of Bahrainis are Shiite Muslims, while 30 per cent are Sunnis, including the royal family and the government. The situation is further complicated by the ongoing attempt of Iran—whose people are not Arabs, though they are Shiite Muslims—to further its influence in the region. I suspect that the military assistance to Bahrain by Saudi Arabia, an Arab Sunni majority nation, is also affected by a determination to block Iranian influence in the region. We should also remember that Bahrain is the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet—another complication.

Given the manoeuvring of Saudi Arabia and Iran on Bahrain and the region, we should be careful about making too many assumptions about the nature of what is happening in that country. I know that the member for Werriwa is a deep thinker on these matters, and I consider his motions to be particularly interesting; but, in reading the words of this motion, I cannot help but feel the weight of the complications that affect Bahrain. There is a history of enmity between Sunni and Shiite Muslims across the world. Indeed, it seems that, through the dictatorships and autocracies that have dominated the Arab Middle East, sectarian enmities have been kept in check, albeit replaced with dominance by and advantages for a particular ruling elite. That is probably a description that applies to Bahrain, although it is notable that the Bahraini ambassador to the US is Jewish and the head of mission in the UK is a Christian lady. So the Bahrainis highlight religious tolerance, and that is quite impressive in comparison to Bahrain's near neighbours.

I turn to the specifics of this motion. In February 2011 members of the majority Shiite community took to the streets demanding more of a say in government. After some weeks of protests, the Bahraini government asked for the assistance of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and that included troops from Saudi Arabia. Iran is suspected of influencing and backing Shiite opposition groups, and both Iran and the GCC warned against foreign interference in Bahrain. Yesterday eight men were sentenced in a Bahraini court to up to 15 years jail each for plotting with Iran against Bahrain. The plot included plans to target the interior ministry, the causeway to Saudi Arabia and the Saudi embassy. Three of the men were said even to have had contacts with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Basij militia.

What is clear is that the issues in Bahrain are fundamental and run deep. The domestic political situation and its outcomes could have ramifications for the whole region. A change of government in Bahrain would probably see a reduction in US military capability and a lift in Iranian influences in the Gulf. The monarchy and the Sunni-led authorities no doubt fear not only a potential loss of control but also the retribution that could follow—which has been so apparent in other parts of the Arab world.

The motion highlights the calls for action from the UN Secretary-General and human rights NGOs, which emphasise the abuses of human rights and brutal crackdowns by the authorities in Bahrain. Yet I question the effectiveness of these actions, given the motivations and complications that are at the heart of the situation. It is somewhat ironic that countries such as Iran can make use of Western liberal concepts of democracy and human rights to further their influence in the Gulf in appeals to liberal principles, yet completely disregard such issues when they oppresses the Baha'is and other minority religious groups inside their own borders.

In any case, the challenge for the royal family, the Bahraini government and the Gulf states is to seek to increase political participation and provide greater freedoms—and it is right to do so. It is encouraging that constitutional changes have occurred that give broader power to the parliament; however, it is hard to see the end of the political instability, and I remain concerned about the balance of power in the Gulf should this situation continue.

Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to support my colleague the member for Werriwa in this motion. I think that both his contribution and the member for Cowan's contribution have indicated the complexity of regional politics in which Bahrain finds itself. The Arab Spring started in December 2010, when a man in Tunisia burned himself to death in protest at his treatment by police. Through the use of new technology, the movement expanded right across the region, and we saw it culminate in the events on Sunday in the massacre in Hulla in Syria. So there is a lot to be done.

In Bahrain on 14 February 2011 a 'day of rage' was organised, again using social networking. As the member for Werriwa outlined, the unrest stems from the repression of the Shiite majority by the Sunni minority. According to a report in Reuters, unlike the people involved in the movements in Egypt and Tunisia which resulted in an overthrow of governments, the Shiite majority are seeking to have a greater say in the running of Bahrain.

I became interested earlier this year when the Grand Prix focused and renewed attention on the civil unrest in Bahrain. Analyst Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Doha Centre said:

For Bahrain's regime, the Fl race was a massive, almost embarrassing, failure. For the opposition, it was a godsend.

Mansoor al-Jamri, editor of al-Wasat, a respected independent Bahraini newspaper, said he was 'amazed by the state of denial' in official statements about the kingdom. 'The price we have to pay for the FI,' was added as a comment by Nabeel Rajab of the Bahrain Human Rights Society to a picture of a young man being treated for bruises and contusions on his torso and legs. Another opposition supporter described the events as 'tyrant family killing people and Fl helping make it look good.' Another tweeted: 'F1 race is over but Bahrain revolutions continue.'

It is true, as we have heard in this debate and the one before, that Australia has to be careful that it does not impose its will on nations that are undergoing great change and that hope to move towards the sort of democracy which we would we understand but which must still have a cultural context for it to be successful and sustainable. Still, Australia has a role to play in ongoing debates about democracy. The member for Werriwa, in his motion, at point (2):

… calls on the Australian Government to raise these human rights abuses in international fora.

Since he tabled the motion on 8 May, we have seen Australia's contribution at the Universal Periodic Review Working Group, 13th session, in Geneva on 21 May 2012. Australia's statement said:

Australia welcomes the pledge of the Bahraini government to implement the BICI recommendations—

that is, the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry recommendations. But it went on to say:

Australia continues to be concerned by reports of human rights violations against peaceful protesters and urges a speedy and fair trial for those who remain in detention. All prisoners should have access to lawyers and due process through the civilian courts.

We take for granted things such as being able to have peaceful demonstrations. If, as a result of those peaceful demonstrations, we are charged with anything, we take for granted that we will have appropriate legal representation. But, amazingly, in Bahrain you are not even allowed to have medical attention. At the protests in February, there were injuries and people were regrouping in the grounds of the hospital, because that is where the injured thought they were secure. Doctors and nurses helped those people who were involved in the protests, and what was their reward? They were charged. They faced charges, some of them were found guilty and they face approximately 15 years in jail because they treated the protestors. Under international pressure, those people are now having their cases reheard.

It is not just this parliament that takes an interest in these things. The European parliament has reiterated its view that demonstrators in Bahrain have expressed their legitimate democratic aspirations and it calls on the government there to engage in genuine, meaningful and constructive dialogue with the opposition. That is what the member for Werriwa's motion asked for. (Time expired)

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is quite significant that we are debating this motion tonight, after yesterday's events in Syria, as mentioned by the previous speaker, and also in the light of what has occurred since September 2010 and the start of the Arab Spring.

When it comes to Bahrain, we have to look at the broader context; we also have to look at the human rights situation. Wealways have to remember that the broader geostrategic outlook should not in any way stop us from looking at what is occurring with human rights. If you want to look at what happened in Bahrain, especially in 2011, and if you want to look at the cause, the US State Department's 2010 human rights report clearly shows what the issues are. The report states:

Citizens did not have the right to change their government. Trafficking in persons and restrictions on the rights of foreign resident workers continued to be significant problems. There were numerous reports of abuse against foreign workers, particularly female domestic workers. There were many reports of domestic violence against women and children. Discrimination on the basis of gender, religion, nationality and sect, especially against the Shia majority population, persisted. There were multiple allegations of mistreatment and torture, especially of Shia activists associated with rejectionist and opposition groups. Authorities arbitrarily arrested activists, journalists and other citizens and detained some individuals incommunicado.

That is a fairly significant and damning report by the US State Department on the human rights situation. I think that was a precursor to what we have seen, because if governments continue to not allow the right to vote, the right to change a government and the freedoms that we enjoy, such as freedom of the press, eventually populations will rise up and demand a greater say. That is what we have seen happen with Bahrain.

I think the Australian government throughout 2011 and into 2012 got the balance right in dealing with this issue. I draw the House's attention to something that then foreign minister Kevin Rudd had to say, because I think that he got the balance right. He said:

We urge all sides to avoid violence and exercise restraint. In particular, the Government calls upon the authorities in Bahrain to respect the right of their people to peaceful protest and freedom of expression. All efforts must be made to avoid further loss of life and injury.

Further he said:

We recognise steps taken by Bahrain on political and economic reforms. Further progress is needed in meeting the legitimate aspirations of Bahrainis for political, economic and social opportunities and reform.

I think that the then foreign minister got that right. We do have to recognise what steps have been taken by Bahrain and the geostrategic climate in which they are taking those steps, but at the same time we have to recognise what was in the 2010 report of the US State Department. Some of the activities which are taking place are unacceptable and need to be dealt with by the Bahraini government as a matter of urgency. If they do that, then hopefully the steps that are taken by the Bahraini government to address these concerns will mean that the violence we have seen in countries such as Syria in the last 24 hours will not occur. (Time expired)