If torture can be described as the imposition of pain or stress to effect compliance then the plea bargaining process as used by the US Military Commission against David Hicks can be seen as a new and effective refinement of the torture process.
The US and Australian Governments needed David Hicks to plead guilty to a terrorism related offence in order to justify their own positions in demonising him over the last 5 years and were prepared to go to any lengths to ensure his compliance.
Torture often uses a mix of carrots and sticks to torment and confuse the subject into submission and the plea bargaining process as practiced by the prosecution at Guantanamo Bay has done exactly that.
After several years of solitary confinement they allowed him to briefly meet with his family and then began the Military Commission process by disbarring two of his three lawyers at the last possible moment. Everyone, including David, knew at that point, if it wasn’t obvious before, that the Commission had no possibility of ever finding him innocent.
The stick in this process was obvious; a not guilty plea would result in the maximum sentence of 20 years, quite possibly in solitary at Guantanamo Bay with the prospect of rarely, if ever, seeing his family again. The carrot was a considerably lesser sentence to be served in Australia with regular visits by family and friends.
What would you do?
Whatever the outcome for David we will never be sure that any small semblance of justice was served by the process.
What we can be sure of, however, is that our own Australian Government, whose brief it is to protect the rights of Australian citizens, stood by and watched with shameful anticipation while an Australian citizen was faced with a choice he should never been forced to make.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment