Page 2799 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 21 October 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The sorts of things perpetrated against civilians in Uganda, however, are not the only problem. There is also a very harsh policy in force against soldiers of the Ugandan Army. There are many documented cases of detention of soldiers without charge or trial. Torture, apparently, is also not unexceptional, even in the case of soldiers. There have been unfair trials of prisoners accused of desertion. Soldiers are governed by a military legal regulation system which prescribes the death penalty for over 20 different offences. When those offences are proved, or apparently proved, and that penalty is imposed, there is virtually no proper right of appeal for soldiers in those circumstances. At least 40 soldiers have been convicted of offences while off duty and have been publicly executed following summary trials.
Members will be aware that Amnesty International has retained a consistent approach of rejecting the use of the death penalty in any way. The number of countries which use the death penalty is, fortunately, on the decline but is, unfortunately, still in use in a number of places, and Uganda is one very clear case of it being used very much to excess. The death penalty is mandatory for murder, rape and treason in Uganda and is applied in a number of other cases as well. Australia ceased to use the death penalty at least 25 years ago, and I believe that it is only fair that other countries should come to realise that the death penalty is an inappropriate method of reducing the incidence of crime or of treating people who have been convicted of crimes. I believe that we should indicate very clearly that we would like to contribute to the process of other countries abandoning that device for dealing with problems.
Amnesty International's campaign is two-pronged. It is designed, first of all, to congratulate the Ugandan Government on the improvements which it has effected in the human rights situation. The situation before the present Government came to power was even worse than it is now. Therefore, I think the Government deserves some commendation for having managed to wind back the abuses. It also deserves congratulations on its rhetoric. But it is also important, under the second prong, for us to be encouraging the taking of strong action by the Ugandan Government to address continuing problems in its human rights record. Why do we talk about Uganda?
Mr Berry: What does the Liberal Party say about capital punishment?
MR HUMPHRIES: The Liberal Party's position on capital punishment is to oppose it quite firmly. I hope that that will never change. Madam Speaker, we believe that Uganda should be put in the spotlight at this point in time. Africa generally has been out of the spotlight in the human rights sense for some time, except of course for South Africa and the problems of famine and drought in places such as Somalia and Mozambique. Generally speaking, Uganda has been out of the spotlight. There is a very strong need for us to remind people that serious human rights abuses are occurring in that country.
It is also time for us to be advancing a little further the notion that our concern about human rights does not extend just to people who are like us or who live near us. Our concern for human rights should be just as strong for the person who lives in a remote continent of this world as it is for someone who lives in the next suburb or the next street. We have a common humanity with those people. We have to express that humanity, articulate that humanity, by making sure that we stand up for the rights of all those peoples wherever they might be.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .