Page 3185 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 18 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
individuals caught up in places of conflict, war or religious violence. They, and the local non-combatants they serve, can only remain alive and free of torture if the warring parties comply with the conventions. Australian government and non-government officials must insist upon combatants adhering to the conventions and international humanitarian law generally.
Accordingly, I think it is fitting today that the Assembly take the opportunity to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Geneva conventions and the recognition of the achievements of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Australian Red Cross in advancing the conventions. There are many members of our local community who participate strongly in the activities of the Red Cross through fundraising, welfare and other forms of assistance, and there are many Canberrans who have contributed in international arenas to the advancement of human rights and humanitarian law, to the advancement and protection of refugees and all those caught up in conflict. For these reasons, it is appropriate that we recognise this important anniversary today, and I commend the motion to the Assembly.
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (11.13): I thank Mr Corbell for bringing this motion to the Assembly. It is certainly a worthy motion on the 60th anniversary of the Geneva conventions. I thank Mr Seselja for allowing me to speak before him on this matter. I have got to get away to, funnily enough, a Vietnam veterans function shortly.
The key principle about the Geneva conventions, and the phrase that has been used recently, is even wars have laws. I think it very well summarises exactly what the Geneva conventions are about, ensuring that even when hostilities occur, when nations are in conflict, there need to be some protocols that govern the way that we conduct ourselves. And certainly, if you look at the history of the Geneva conventions and how they have arrived, they are derived from civilised nations that have realised that, in some ways, the armies and the way they combat actually reflect the societies that those militaries come from and that there are standards that need to be applied, even on the battlefield.
I note the ICRC’s role in the development and the implementation of the Geneva conventions. They have certainly played a very important role in facilitating what has been such an important piece of law. They have had difficulty in negotiating with so many nations to actually come to the table and agree. I think it has been a remarkable success. They have been largely successful since their implementation. It has not always been so, and often we do focus on the negative and where the laws of the Geneva conventions have not worked.
The first convention is about the wounded and sick military personnel. The understanding that we have, the instant recognition that we have—of ambulances that we might see on television driving in the Middle East with a red crescent or a red cross on them, or the images from M*A*S*H of hospitals with a red cross on them—and how that has become such an important part of the feature of combat and combat situations, we now take for granted. But that has not come by accident; it has come as a direct consequence of that Geneva convention.
The second convention deals with the wounded and sick at sea. I think we treat with horror the sight that we see of sailors whose ships have been sunk and who are left
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .