Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Pursuant to contingent notice, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Brown moving a motion relating to the conduct of the business of this Senate, namely a motion to give precedence to general business notice of motion No. 63.

This relates to the issue of the death penalty being rampant in China. Though somewhat pulled back by recent legislation to include only ‘extremely vile criminals’ according to the President of the Supreme People’s Court, Xiao Yang, China is nevertheless the place which executes more people—and sometimes these executions can only be described as summary executions because they occur within weeks of a court hearing, in which very often the people have no representation and no freedom to argue their case as we understand it in Australia—than the rest of the world put together. Included amongst those potentially facing the death penalty are political prisoners and people who the communist dictatorship in Beijing sees as a threat to its power. Currently we know there has been insurrection in Tibet and indeed in the Uygur part of western China, where death penalties have been handed out recently against people who were alleged to have been plotting against the Olympic Games.

The current massive movement of troops into Tibet can only be seen as a crackdown on political dissent within the Tibetan people. We know from past form under President Hu Jintao, who was the governor of Tibet in the late 1980s, that the death penalty is used as a coercive threat against people who have a different political point of view to the dictatorship in Beijing. We in Australia are not only historically opposed to the death penalty but also horrified by the potential for the death penalty to be used because of people’s political activities. I know that the government has a view that no single country should be named in motions such as this, but I believe this is a time when, as a chamber of the great Australian parliament, we ought to be directly calling on China to not use the death penalty.

There is no doubt that the Prime Minister and the government of the day will say, ‘Well, we will raise the issue of the death penalty.’ I ask: where is the logic, therefore, that a chamber of this parliament should not exactly promote the same matter of human rights and welfare? Of course we should, and I make no apology for particularly asking for the Senate to have the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Smith, seek the abandonment of the death penalty in China. This is a very reasonable motion. It is very directly targeted. It says what it means. I do not accept the argument that we have no place in this great and powerful Senate of Australia in calling directly on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to consult with another country on a matter as serious as this.

I reiterate that China puts to death by judicial decree more people than all the other countries of the world put together—Iran included. In 2006 Amnesty International recorded 1,000 death penalties in China but estimated that the total would be closer to 8,000. Other human rights groups put it as high as 10,000. These groups include the US State Department. I am—and I am sure many Australians are—absolutely horrified at the prospect that there will be summary executions in Tibet. (Time expired)