Indonesia passes on trial of Bali bomber

[matsaleh]

From The Sydney Morning Herald this morning : Indonesia passes on trial of Bali bomber
​

Indonesia passes on trial of Bali bomber

Tom Allard, Dylan Welch

July 6, 2011

INDONESIA wants Australia or another country to extradite and prosecute one of the masterminds behind the 2002 Bali bombings, Umar Patek, because it fears a trial in Jakarta would increase terrorist risks.

In an exclusive interview with the Herald, the head of Indonesia's anti-terrorism agency Ansyaad Mbai said Mr Patek would become a new figurehead for violent jihadis if returned to the country of his birth.

His comments highlight the rift among countries about what to do with Mr Patek, who was arrested this year in Abbottabad, Pakistan, the same place as the leader of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, was killed.

Mr Patek had eluded authorities for almost a decade after fleeing Indonesia after the bombings, which killed 202 people.

''Umar Patek was chased by many countries. There was a [million]-dollar prize on his head but now that he's arrested it's as if Indonesia must face the problem alone,'' Mr Ansyaad said.

''This man is very dangerous. His presence here would increase the terror threat, not only to Indonesia but to several countries with a presence here. He'll be like fresh air for remnants of the terrorism network. [The terrorists] are dangerous, they still exist and they've been waiting for a figurehead such as Umar Patek.''

Mr Ansyaad said Indonesia would face difficulties bringing Mr Patek to justice, noting that the bombings occurred before Indonesia enacted its counter-terrorism laws.

The other attack linked to Mr Patek, the multiple bombing of Indonesian churches on Christmas Day in 2000, also took place before the laws were introduced.

Mr Ansyaad said Australia had lost 88 people in the first bombings and could prosecute Mr Patek, who he called the ''main designer'' of the bomb.

An expert on terrorism legislation at the University of Sydney, Ben Saul, said there was no legal impediment to Australia's charging Mr Patek, given that most of Australia's counter-terrorism legislation was enacted in early 2002, several months before the bombings.

But the reality would be more complicated and Australia would have to organise extradition from Pakistan and receive assistance from Indonesia about evidence and witnesses.

Such a decision would be virtually unprecedented because in the past 60 years ''Australia has never prosecuted someone for an international crime committed on foreign territory''.

In May Australia's counter-terrorism ambassador, Bill Paterson, said it remained an option to try Mr Patek in Australia.

But it is understood the Gillard government, the US, Pakistan and the Philippines have pushed Indonesia to take on the responsibility. Yesterday the Foreign Affairs Minister, Kevin Rudd, who is due to visit Jakarta this week, also appeared to dismiss the proposition. ''Given Patek is an Indonesian citizen and that some of the most serious crimes he is believed to have committed took place in Indonesia, the Australian government considers any action should in the first instance be taken by Indonesian authorities,'' his spokeswoman said.

If Mr Patek is tried in Indonesia, it would be under the country's emergency law that forbids the use, possession and transportation of illegal weapons and explosives. The law carries the death penalty.

But keeping him in detention before and after any trial would be problematic because Indonesia's prison system is riddled by corruption and lax security and it would be hard to stop Mr Patek rebuilding a network from behind bars.

 

[spicyayam]

For sure there could be problems bringing him back to Indonesia, but what is the alternative? If they don't bring him back what kind of message does that send to terrorists?

But keeping him in detention before and after any trial would be problematic because Indonesia's prison system is riddled by corruption and lax security and it would be hard to stop Mr Patek rebuilding a network from behind bars.

That shouldn't be used an excuse not to bring him back, but motivation to fix the problems with the prisons.

 

[matsaleh]

My feeling is if the Australian government extradited Patek and tried him 'for an international crime committed on foreign territory', he'd be lynched before he got to court.

Emotions still run high in Australia regarding the bombings, particularly in the eastern suburbs of Sydney where 20 local residents were killed in the 2002 bombing.

 

[spicyayam]

The crime was in his home country and even though many Australians died in the bombing, I cannot see how he can be tried there. I think it is something Indonesia has to deal with, but with the support of the international community.

 

[widder]

I think it's a case of the Indonesian authorities trying to pass the buck. The way I see it, any country which prosecutes Umar Patek faces the same potential problems as Indonesia does. Anyway, the guy is an Indonesian citizen and the crimes were committed in Indonesia, so he should stand trial here.

 

[gilbert de jong]

maybe an 'accident' could happen while transporting him from country A to country B

 

[widder]

An Indonesian human rights activist died on a Garuda flight under mysterious circumstances, which was a terrible crime, committed by .... maybe there could be a repeat performances, this time for a better cause?

 

[gilbert de jong]

yeah that Munir guy right? Wasn't he poisoned by....the answer is in the BIN :icon_wink:

 

[Markit]

I think it would be a golden opportunity for Pakistan to prove what campaigner it is for human rights and antiterrorism and throw down on the side of international law and prosecute the fecker there - I'm sure he must have broken some laws there. Even if it was just immigration - hell 2 years in a Pakistani prison should just about finish anybody off.

And on the up side if terrorism were to increase in Pakistan because of it - who would notice?