1) Lawyer blasts govt for refusing to let activist speak
2) Speaker's overkill denies right of free speech
-----------------------
1) Lawyer blasts govt for refusing to let activist speak
Jennifer Robinson, who is part of Julian Assange's defence team, is in NZ briefly with Benny Wenda. Photo / Greg Bowker
A leading human rights lawyer yesterday hit out at a decision banning a West Papua independence activist from speaking at Parliament.New Zealand briefly with Benny Wenda, a leader of the self-determination campaign for West Papua , which is under Indonesian control.London Labour MP Maryan Street Indonesia Indonesia Jakarta would have meddled in the decision, but it made New Zealand seem very reactive toIndonesia Victoria University on the independence struggle in West Papua .London Britain London Sweden would not deliver him to the United States US
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10864819
2) Speaker's overkill denies right of free speech
By John Armstrong
5:30 AM Tuesday Feb 12, 2013
Is New Zealand's relationship with Indonesia so lacking in robustness that it could not tolerate a West Papuan independence activist speaking at a lunch-hour meeting in the Beehive foyer?
That is the only conclusion to be drawn from the decision by new Speaker David Carter to refuse permission to three Opposition MPs - Labour's Maryan Street, the Greens' Catherine Delahunty and Mana's Hone Harawira - to host such a function for Benny Wenda, a United Kingdom-exiled West Papuan leader.
Carter's ruling was made on the advice of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Under Parliament's rules for MPs hosting such functions, the Speaker is obliged to consult the ministry if there are concerns about "potential diplomatic ramifications".
Given the ministry's pathological caution, it is not difficult to guess the nature of its advice. Given that advice, Carter may have felt he had no choice but to block the Opposition MPs' request. If so, the guidelines are horribly outdated. Parliament should not be hostage to the self-interest of a Government department. There might have been ramifications for New Zealand had such an event been hosted by the governing party.
But - as Street says - National could have ordered its MPs not to go if it was worried their presence at the function would go down badly with the Indonesian embassy in Wellington.
The Indonesians might not like attention being drawn to their occupation of the former Dutch colony which New Zealand recognises and which followed a dubious plebiscite in the 1960s. But a one-off parliamentary function was hardly going to threaten New Zealand's near $1 billion-a-year export trade with the southeast Asian giant.
And even if it did, then rights to free speech - especially in the environs of Parliament - must be deemed to be more important than the almighty trade dollar.
It is not as if the Beehive foyer is a stranger to controversy. With one exception, Labour MPs, who were in Government at that time, stayed away from the 2004 launch of a book detailing Ahmed Zaoui's struggle for political asylum.
Everyone had heard of Zaoui by then.
A comparative handful would have heard of Wenda before the Speaker's ban. Administrative overkill means a lot more will be aware of him now.
2) Speaker's overkill denies right of free speech
-----------------------
Jennifer Robinson, who is part of Julian Assange's defence team, is in NZ briefly with Benny Wenda. Photo / Greg Bowker
A leading human rights lawyer yesterday hit out at a decision banning a West Papua independence activist from speaking at Parliament.
Jennifer Robinson, a member of Julian Assange's defence team, is in New Zealand briefly with Benny Wenda, a leader of the self-determination campaign for West Papua , which is under Indonesian control.
Several MPs wanted Mr Wenda, who lives in exile in London
He reconfirmed his decision yesterday despite a plea from Labour MP Maryan Street
The Speaker's office said the request was declined because the function did not meet guidelines to using parliamentary facilities and hosting guests.
Mr Wenda was expected to speak about alleged human rights abuses in West Papua, and highlight NZ's military relationships with Indonesia
Miss Robinson said: "It raises very serious questions about the influence Indonesia
Miss Robinson did not know for certain whether Jakarta would have meddled in the decision, but it made New Zealand seem very reactive toIndonesia Victoria University on the independence struggle in West Papua .
An Australian, Miss Robinson is based in London Britain
Since 2010, Miss Robinson has been part of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's legal team.
Yesterday she defended Assange's decision to remain holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London
There was no guarantee Sweden would not deliver him to the United States US
Miss Robinson also said she had no intention of abandoning Mr Assange, who has seen several high-profile supporters desert his cause.
The latest was the heiress and magazine editor Jemima Khan, who last Friday washed her hands of Mr Assange, comparing him to an "Australian L. Ron Hubbard" after the Scientology founder.
"We have grave concerns should he ever be returned," Miss Robinson said. Asked if she was hanging in with Mr Assange, she said: "Absolutely."
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10864819
2) Speaker's overkill denies right of free speech
By John Armstrong
5:30 AM Tuesday Feb 12, 2013
Is New Zealand's relationship with Indonesia so lacking in robustness that it could not tolerate a West Papuan independence activist speaking at a lunch-hour meeting in the Beehive foyer?
That is the only conclusion to be drawn from the decision by new Speaker David Carter to refuse permission to three Opposition MPs - Labour's Maryan Street, the Greens' Catherine Delahunty and Mana's Hone Harawira - to host such a function for Benny Wenda, a United Kingdom-exiled West Papuan leader.
Carter's ruling was made on the advice of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Under Parliament's rules for MPs hosting such functions, the Speaker is obliged to consult the ministry if there are concerns about "potential diplomatic ramifications".
Given the ministry's pathological caution, it is not difficult to guess the nature of its advice. Given that advice, Carter may have felt he had no choice but to block the Opposition MPs' request. If so, the guidelines are horribly outdated. Parliament should not be hostage to the self-interest of a Government department. There might have been ramifications for New Zealand had such an event been hosted by the governing party.
But - as Street says - National could have ordered its MPs not to go if it was worried their presence at the function would go down badly with the Indonesian embassy in Wellington.
The Indonesians might not like attention being drawn to their occupation of the former Dutch colony which New Zealand recognises and which followed a dubious plebiscite in the 1960s. But a one-off parliamentary function was hardly going to threaten New Zealand's near $1 billion-a-year export trade with the southeast Asian giant.
And even if it did, then rights to free speech - especially in the environs of Parliament - must be deemed to be more important than the almighty trade dollar.
It is not as if the Beehive foyer is a stranger to controversy. With one exception, Labour MPs, who were in Government at that time, stayed away from the 2004 launch of a book detailing Ahmed Zaoui's struggle for political asylum.
Everyone had heard of Zaoui by then.
A comparative handful would have heard of Wenda before the Speaker's ban. Administrative overkill means a lot more will be aware of him now.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.