PETER GRAY
Dr JENSEN» (Tangney) (7:50 PM) —I rise to express grave concern at the
government’s gross neglect of one of my constituents, an Australian
national who has effectively been detained without trial in Mauritius
for the last four years. Peter Gray was arrested in 2005 after flying
to Mauritius. He met a woman on the plane who was later found to be
smuggling heroin into the country. She allegedly implicated him, but
withdrew her claim after she was convicted. But Mr Gray’s detention
continued. He denies all charges, and since his arrest, for the last
four years, he has been in prison or forced to stay in Mauritius.
Australia’s most significant contribution to the matter seems to be its
cancellation of Mr Gray’s passport. Consider that for a moment. An
Australian national is arrested in another country and then charged
with a serious offence, which he denies, and then he is detained for
several years without a trial. Australia does not raise a hue and cry
about this grave injustice, does not protest and does not apply any
pressure to at least have the matter dealt with in the courts. No, the
members opposite cancelled this man’s passport. He needed help and you,
the so-called government, delivered what was effectively a presumption
of guilt.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs does not want to
talk about this case publicly. He has not responded to repeated and
sometimes daily questions from the media. He replied just last week to
a letter I sent him on 2 July, saying that the cancellation of Mr
Gray’s passport was justified. He said it would be ‘inappropriate’ for
Australia to make representations to Mauritius as long as legal action
was continuing.
The question here is not one of innocence
or guilt. I make no judgement as to Mr Gray’s culpability, though on
balance the facts as they are known would tend to support his denials.
The issue is one of justice. Four years is an unreasonable delay. To
hold someone in such limbo is a terrible cruelty. The government has
demonstrated in other cases that it is able to act when Australian
nationals are arrested overseas. Recent examples include the mother
detained in Thailand for stealing a bar mat and young Australians held
over drugs in Indonesia. But Mr Gray, a middle-aged, average
Australian, apparently does not fall into this category warranting
attention. How many other Peter Grays are out there?
In
2007-08 DFAT reported it had contact with 1,249 Australians arrested or
imprisoned overseas and believed there were many more cases in which
Australia was not notified. Whatever the circumstances of the case, Mr
Gray deserves to have the matter resolved. The delays are a gross
infringement of Mr Gray’s rights. To deny him his liberty and to
effectively detain him for so long without ever being convicted of an
offence is a disgraceful abuse of state power. All Australians would
expect that if they were ever detained in another country their
government would step in to ensure they were treated reasonably. Four
years is not a reasonable period to resolve a criminal matter. This
could happen to you, it could happen to me and it is completely
unacceptable.
It is also very disturbing that Australia has
apparently cancelled Mr Gray’s passport simply on the basis that he has
been charged with a criminal offence. The assumption of innocence is
the bedrock of our judicial system and must not be sacrificed. If the
concern was one of flight risk when considering whether Mr Gray could
be released from prison pending trial, other measures could have been
implemented, such as simply surrendering his passport to local
authorities. On the surface of it, Australia’s cancellation of Mr
Gray’s passport makes our country and all of us complicit in this
travesty of justice. Australians have a right to expect that the
government will do something other than cancel their passports and then
wait for the outcome of legal proceedings, no matter how many years it
takes. The foreign minister needs to act on Mr Gray’s case. To do
anything less is a dereliction of duty.