Julie Bishop - Member for Curtin

Sky News, PM Agenda with David Speers

Subjects: Detention of Australian lawyer in Libya; Syria; border protection

E&OE…

DAVID SPEERS    For more on this I am joined live from Perth by the Shadow Foreign Minister and Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop. Thanks for your time. What do you make of the Australian government’s handling of this case so far, has it been appropriate?

JULIE BISHOP    I am pleased the Australian government has dispatched David Ritchie, our Ambassador-designate to Libya, to Libya to locate Melinda Taylor, to ensure that she is safe and well and to secure her immediate release. David Ritchie is one of our most experienced Ambassadors and to have him on the ground to provide whatever consulate support Melinda Taylor may need is very important.

It is also very important that the Libyan authorities be mindful of the significance of the work of the International Criminal Court, and I understand that this delegation, the delegation of which Melinda Taylor is a part, was there with the approval and authorisation of the Libyan authorities. So we join with the government in calling on the Libyan authorities to release her as soon as possible.

DAVID SPEERS    If she is there with the approval of the Libyan authorities what then do you make of what Bob Carr was just telling us that she is now being held under the control of the Attorney-General and judicial police? They are Libyan authorities as well?

JULIE BISHOP    The picture is somewhat confusing. The first reports indicated that she was being held by some sort of militia and one could perhaps understand that the militia didn’t appreciate the need for even Colonel Gaddafi’s son to have legal representation. They were the early reports, but it now seems that the national authorities have become involved. I understand from Senator Carr that Melinda Taylor is being held by the Attorney-General or his judicial police. I don’t know what status they have but at least it sounds a little more positive that there is some official involvement, and that is why it is important for Ambassador Ritchie to get to Libya to make contact with Melinda Taylor and to secure her immediate release.

DAVID SPEERS    It is hardly an advertisement for a young Australian lawyer to take up work for the organisation, the International Criminal Court, if they find themselves in this sort of situation.

JULIE BISHOP    The President of the Court has made it clear that the delegation should attract diplomatic or legal immunity and it is very important not only for Melinda Taylor, not only for the integrity of the prosecutions in Libya, but also for the standing of the International Criminal Court that countries abide by their international obligations. Melinda Taylor was there as part of a delegation that had been authorised by Libya to be in Libya, that they understood that Colonel Gaddafi’s son was entitled to a defence team in light of the prosecution against him and that lawyers would be able to have a privileged contact with him. It seems that somewhere along the line messages have got mixed, there are some allegations concerning the behaviour of the delegation. My view is those matters can be raised directly with the International Criminal Court but in the meantime Melinda Taylor and the delegation must be free to go home.

DAVID SPEERS    Can I turn, Julie Bishop, to the situation in Syria? After the military intervention in Libya a lot of people are wondering why can’t we do the same thing with Syria given international condemnation and actions to date – well they appear to have fallen of deaf ears. Is it simply a problem is Syria is practically different, they have a strong military defence and of course the ties with Iran? Is military action off the table or should it be considered?

JULIE BISHOP    There is understandable international outrage about the atrocities and the ongoing violence in Syria, but while ever Russia and China refuse to support any United Nations Security Council resolution regarding military intervention, it will not occur. There are significant differences with the situation in Libya but there is no alternative government in Syria, indeed the dictators in the Syrian regime have made sure there is no alternative. There have been decades of oppression to ensure that no alternative can survive, and so we are not dealing with the same situation in Libya. Likewise Syria is more central to Middle Eastern affairs, both geographically and politically, and it is an extremely complex situation involving many players, many actors, not the least being Russia, China and Iran.

Kofi Annan’s ceasefire plan has not been a success to date but there are efforts to revive it and Russia has suggested an international conference. The United States and other members of the international community are not against the idea but it is being bogged down in details as to who should attend this conference. Russia is suggesting that Iran should be there. Now before Iran can be contemplated as being part of this international conference it would have to demonstrate a commitment to peace in Syria and there are reports that there are Iranian troops on the ground in Syria.

DAVID SPEERS    They are all good reasons and particularly you mention there the complex nature of the regional politics, the relationship with Iran, the lack of an alternative government – if you like – in Syria, but all of that is cold comfort to the people of Syria isn’t it when they are suffering, they are dying at the hands of whoever is responsible, and arguably the Syrian government is. What can be done about the situation?

JULIE BISHOP    You are absolutely right David. There have been 15 months of uprisings in Syria and President Assad could bring an end to the violence immediately if he directed his troops not to fire on civilians. The supposed ceasefire has now been ignored by both sides. The Syrian army have broken the ceasefire and of course the opposition have responded, each blaming the other for breaching the ceasefire. But what the international community needs to do is to continue pressure on President Assad through the form of economic sanctions, which can have an impact, but also through opportunities to support Kofi Annan’s ceasefire plan.

The option of military intervention should always be a last option. But as I said while Russia and China have refused to support such a UN Security Council resolution, military intervention is unlikely to be implemented any time soon as it was in Libya because it was backed by a UN Security Council resolution.

DAVID SPEERS    Can I bring you back home to the border protection debate here? We have had two more boats arrive today carrying asylum seekers - between them almost 150 asylum seekers - these two have arrived just off Christmas Island. Tony Abbott over the weekend announced some tougher policy measure including a presumption against granting asylum to those who don’t have documents. Can you explain to us just what happens then? So if someone doesn’t have the right documents and they are denied a refugee visa because of that, where are they sent, back to Indonesia?

JULIE BISHOP    What Tony Abbott did over the weekend was announce a series of tougher measures in relation to refugee assessments. We are sending a very strong message to people smugglers that we know what their operations are, we know what their methods are, and we will not be a soft touch as the current government is and that we will, as we have done in the past, break up these criminal syndicates, we will shut down the people smuggling trade.

And you just have to look at the statistics to see how far the government has failed in maintaining integrity in our border protection system – 11 boats in 11 days. The government is working on an average of 450 people per month, already there has been something like 12,000 arrive since Julia Gillard has been Prime Minister, 7,000 in the last 12 months which is an all time high.

So we have announced that, should we be honoured to be the next government of this country, we would put in place some tough measures in the refugee assessment field, particularly where people are found to have destroyed their documents and tried to circumvent our regular processes then the presumption will go against them.

DAVID SPEERS    What happens then? If they are not given a refugee visa because of that, where are they sent? If they don’t have documents how do you know where to send them or are they just sent back to Indonesia?

JULIE BISHOP    The Minister would be entitled to make an unfavourable inference about their identity. Obviously steps would have to be taken to identify where they come from then they would be sent back to where they came from.

But it would have to be done on a case by case analysis David, obviously. Each case would require assessment. But the point is we are not going to be a soft touch on these refugee assessment claims and I think the Captain Emad farce of this past week would indicate just how far the system has broken down.

DAVID SPEERS    What I am getting at is, if you are going to send someone back to where they came from simply because they don’t have documents are we in breech of any of our international obligations by doing that?

JULIE BISHOP    The Minister would be entitled to make an inference against the applicant under the existing laws, as I understand it. So as it is now, even if someone has deliberately destroyed their documents to circumvent our processes, then the authorities in Australia have tended to give it a tick and a flick. The point we are making is that the onus should be reversed against the person who has deliberately destroyed their documents rather than having the onus in favour of them even if they have destroyed documents.

DAVID SPEERS    Alright, Shadow Foreign Minister Julie Bishop thank you for joining us.

JULIE BISHOP    It has been my pleasure.