Was Labor's "me-too" policy taken too far last week with the abandonment of its stance on the death penalty?

2007 may become the year that state sanctioned murder becomes an election issue.

On October 8 Robert McClelland, Federal Labor’s foreign affairs spokesman, courageously spoke out against the death penalty for the Bali bombers.

The following day, Kevin Rudd overruled his frontbencher, ensuring no one doubts Labor’s commitment to winning an election.

Mr Rudd described Mr McClelland’s comments as insensitive, as they came just four days before the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks which claimed the lives of 88 Australians.

According to the Opposition Leader, no Rudd government will ever intervene to spare the life of a terrorist.

This contradicted Mr McClelland’s assertion that a Labor government would oppose state executions in Asia, where an estimated 80 per cent of the world’s criminal executions are carried out.

As a result, Mr Rudd's standing in the polls dropped slightly at a crucial time. However, the consensus seems to be that Australia took issue with the way he dismissed his frontbencher. However, this issue cast a second shadow over the aspiring Prime Minister.

The Opposition leader describes himself as “hardline” on terrorists. Others might say vicious, or perhaps inhumane.

Mr Rudd’s comments pushed him outside his somewhat cherubic public persona, indicating that the only way he would like to see terrorists leave custody is “in a pine box.”

Indonesia’s judicial system has been the focus of much scrutiny in the Australian media, following the trials of Schapelle Corby and the Bali Nine. Labor has indicated that it would strongly advocate clemency on behalf of Australian citizens facing capital punishment, as has the Coalition. Both approve, however, of state sanctioned killings of terrorists – so long as it isn’t on our soil.

Theoretically, Australia is ideologically opposed to the death penalty as a signatory to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Additionally, we co-sponsor a UN human rights initiative that calls for all nations to abolish capital punishment.

It would seem that in this climate of rampant nationalism, execution is justified – unless the victim is Australian.

Labor says it will protect the rights of Australian citizens, but that it will never intervene diplomatically to protect the life of a terrorist. What if the terrorist was an Australian citizen?

I find it interesting that both leaders are calling for blood, despite their vaunted Christian values. Surely divine forgiveness would dictate against capital punishment?

Mr Rudd, the self proclaimed “Christian Socialist,” preaches his own unique take on Christian doctrine by portraying the saviour as a biblical human rights activist. It is difficult to imagine such a person condoning any form of death penalty.

In 2003, Washington Post journalist Richard Cohen summed up the humanitarian perspective by calling for Saddam Hussein to be spared: “I do so not because I have the slightest doubt that he is a killer, responsible for taking the lives of many thousands, but because sparing his life would send a message to the world that judicial death -- so often abused -- is no longer acceptable.”

This is the message that Australia supports as a signatory to the Second Optional Protocol. It is also the message that John Howard has routinely dismissed, and it would appear that the Labor party has once again followed suit.

It would seem that the specter of Mark Latham still looms over the ALP. Fear of controversy has led to lacklustre political debate over issues such as the Northern Territory intervention, the Tasmanian pulp mill and now to human rights.

Generic ideology may well win Labor the election, but perhaps it will be a hollow victory. In sacrificing morals and integrity, the ALP has consistently displayed a win-at-all-costs mentality. Interestingly, a Sydney Morning Herald online poll showed that almost 70 per cent of the 2500 readers surveyed disapproved of giving the Bali bombers the death penalty; they felt it was inhumane. Perhaps this means Rudd’s brutality will backfire come November 24, although I doubt it.

Display 2 of 2 comments