The Australian Government appears determined to press on with its policy of putting Air Marshals aboard Australian domestic flights. This is despite an apparent change of heart in Britain, where the Government and the airlines have opted for greater security on the ground to ensure that dangerous items do not get on the aircraft in the first place.
The Australian Government would be well-advised to revisit the scheme in light of what is being done in Britain. The chief executive Britain’s Air transport Users Council, Simon Evans, said, “”Sky marshals are impracticable. There are 460,000 flights from Heathrow alone each year.” Similarly, there are tens of thousands of flights in and out of Sydney, yet Australia has plans for just 111 marshals, just 22 scheduled to begin duty soon.
It is absurd to thinks that potential hijackers would abandon their plans on the basis of the remote chance of running into one of the marshals. More likely, they would continue, but perhaps be more wary and more dangerous.
The marshals themselves pose a threat because their weapons might be taken from them, they might injure people or threaten the aircraft’s safety. Every weapon on an aircraft is likely to reduce safety, not increase it. As a British Airways executive said, “”A determined hijacker would only have to hit him from behind and suddenly you are dealing with a terrorist who has a gun – and that’s much more dangerous than a terrorist with a knife.”
Then there is the difficulty of a clash in the chain of command between the captain pilot and the air marshal.
In Australia, the airlines are still disputing questions of cost and indemnity for the actions of the marshals. The fact that questions of indemnity are arising indicates that the airlines at least sense there are some dangers associated with having armed marshals aboard. Moreover, the police union notes that the marshals are to be drawn from the Australian Protective Service, rather than trained police. In any event, the job of air marshal with be an exceptionally tedious one – flying incessantly on uneventful flights. There has been no major hijacking incident in Australia’s history. Having air marshals is a needless over-reaction to the events of September 11.
The British action gave the Government an opportunity to review the matter and quietly drop it, recognising the idea for what it was – a knee-jerk over-reaction. It is a pity that the Government did not seize the opportunity that was offered.
IN A MATTER ALSO RELATED TO SEPTEMBER 11, the Australian Government is on the right track to try to ensure that the Adelaide man caught fighting for the Taliban is tried in Australia under Australian law.
The man, David Hicks, is being held by US authorities aboard a US ship. The Australian Government should work harder to get him transferred to Australian custody. It would be an outrage if Hicks were to be transferred to the United States to face trial before one of President Bush’s military tribunals where there is no jury, no rules of evidence and no open trial. His chance of a fair trial in the US must be put at very low.
Australia is in Afghanistan as an ally of the US. The US should respect Australia’s jurisdiction over its own nationals.
There would be an exception if the US provided evidence that Hicks had involvement in a crime on US soil, in which case the ordinary processes of extradition would apply.
As it is, though, the US would be better to apply the rule of law, rather than the arbitrary spoils of war to deal with foreigners it catches in Afghanistan.