The trial of two Australians and six Arab foreign aid workers detained in Afghanistan on charges of preaching Christianity is causing justifiable international disquiet.
Much of that disquiet arises from the unpredictability of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the absence of the rule of law independent from the Government, and the huge disparity in possible sentencing, form a few days’ jail to public execution.
Further disquiet is caused by the fact that the offence they have been charged with has no equivalent in Australian law, and in Australia their conduct would be completely lawful. The Taliban law prohibiting freedom of religious expression is offensive and conflicts with Australian ideas about basic freedoms.
For these reasons it is important for Australian to take an active consular interest in this case. The Australian Government should do its best to achieve the release of the jailed aid workers, Diana Thomas and Peter Bunch, and it should do its best to help them with legal aid and general living support.
Sympathy must go out to the aid workers to be in this horrifically uncertain situation – – indeed, facing death. That is not an exaggeration because the record of the Taliban shows they have a flagrant disregard for human life, disrespect for other religions and have a record of many incidences of erratic behaviour.
But our sympathy should not be open-ended because there is another principle at stake here. The Australian Government regularly warns Australians going abroad that they must abide by it the laws of the country that they find themselves in, irrespective of whether those laws are compatible with ours. More importantly, they should be aware that many foreign countries have much harsher penalty regimes than Australia.
In many respects, the two Australians have behaved foolishly. They have allowed religious fervour to get the better of them. They have also engaged in false pretences in entering Afghanistan ostensibly to engage in aid projects but using that as a guise to proselytise their religion.
The Taliban’s intolerant regime is to be condemned or for its human rights breaches, including its appalling treatment of women and girls. The international community should keep up the pressure up to encourage change in Afghanistan. In the meanwhile, however, it would be a very foolish aid worker who breaches Afghan law. Moreover, aid workers who proselytise their religion are likely to be counter-productive on the aid front. If they are seen with Bibles and religious tracts with instructions on how to preach to people of other religions, inevitably they will be jailed or expelled and thus incapable of providing aid to Afghans disadvantaged by the actions of the Taliban Government.
Australia’s action in this case has been commendably sympathetic and restrained. However, it stands in marked contrast to the lack of consular and diplomatic activity to support the two Australian Greenpeace activists who were arrested for violating a safety zone during a protest against the Star Wars missile defence program in California in July. The two face a possible sentence of six years’ jail which is ludicrously severe for such a minor offence.
At least the Greenpeace protesters will get to due process of law. however, Australia should make it plain to US a authorities that it would view with disquiet any severe sentence a rising a from a peaceful protest and what should be a free expression of speech. Australia should also make it plain that the treatment of the protesters after their arrest was grossly disproportionate. To put peaceful protesters in jail for more than a week before being bailed and to bring them into court in ankle irons and handcuffs it was unacceptable.
But perhaps politics makes it difficult to protest to the US Government, whereas the Taliban is an easy and popular target.