Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

OSB media strategy: motherhood statements, minimal content & tautology

By Kellie Tranter - posted Friday, 11 July 2014


"Australia has an obligation to impartially investigate allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, to criminally punish perpetrators, and to provide effective remedies (including compensation) to victims," Saul wrote. "These obligations arise under treaties to which Australia voluntarily committed itself".

The next day, customs & border protection quickly dismissed Fairfax reports that a fresh inquiry would take place, stating that "No such new inquiry or investigation is underway. The allegations were assessed at the time they were first made and found to be without foundation."

Almost two weeks later polls were showing that two thirds of Australian voters, including Coalition supporters, wanted an investigation into the claims that asylum seekers' hands were burned.

Advertisement

Documents released under FOI include "questions and answers" with suggested talking points on the allegations, and a section on "background and chronology" marked "not for public release". It was cleared on 6 February 2014, and details the standing defence instructions for the reporting and management of notifiable incidents, including for a "quick assessment" (QA). It confirmed that:

On learning of the allegations, Commander Border Protection Command (COMBPC) [Rear Admiral Michael Noonan] – who is dual-hatted as Commander Joint Task Force 639 – directed the Commanding Officer (CO) to conduct a QA into the allegations.

The CO directed an appropriately qualified and experienced officer to conduct the QA. The QA report was submitted to CO… who then reviewed the findings, and made a determination with respect of the findings. Later on the same day, COMBPC reviewed the QA and the determination of the CO and agreed the QA findings and supported the determination made by CO…

COMBPC then informed his operational Commanders, Chief of Joint Operations and Deputy Chief Executive Officer Customs, of the findings of QA and his support for the determination made by CO….

In other words, the documents clearly point to a failure to complete an "impartial investigation into the allegations" in accordance with international law. Significantly, after release through FOI, the documents did not include a copy of the "quick assessment", the subsequent CO determination, or any correspondence or findings from the COMBPC, Noonan.

I raised this with customs and was informed on 21 May that "Our line area has identified further documents that would have fallen within the scope of your original request". An internal review was requested and remains ongoing.

In a country that claims adherence to the rule of law, why did we have a "quick assessment", into the burned hands allegations conducted and supported by officers of the same organisation under investigation? Little wonder that the Australian public wanted a proper, impartial investigation – and still wants to know how asylum seekers are treated.

Now, 153 Tamil asylum seekers are detained on the high seas. As usual, the government applied the OSB media strategy to shroud the matters in secrecy. It's cruel, but effective: only the high court could eventually prise out the basic factual detail of what's happening.

Advertisement

The strategy's fundamental premise is containing information, but information cannot be contained when a fundamental tension is created between the way an anonymous inhumane organisation operates, on the one hand, and on the other widespread popular disquiet about what is being done and the way the human actors who make up those organisations feel and believe, particularly when they know they're part of something that is doing the wrong thing.

The Operation Sovereign Borders media strategy is religiously applied by the Government. It has been crafted by senior bureaucrats immersed in a culture of secrecy and impunity, for a Government which has adopted and ruthlessly applied it. It is generally effective in keeping the public in the dark and the media hamstrung. The design flaw in the strategy is government overreach in applying it at the expense of international law, human rights and popular notions of fairness.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

9 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Kellie Tranter is a lawyer and human rights activist. You can follow her on Twitter @KellieTranter

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Kellie Tranter

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Kellie Tranter
Article Tools
Comment 9 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy