|
 The diplomatic cables, ministerial talking points and classified
emails between Australian officials cover a tumultuous period that
began with the 2014 sacking of Nauru's independent judiciary by
President Baron Waqa and end in October 2015 with an Australian
Senate hearing on the arrests of opposition Nauru lawmakers.
In recent months, some critics have said Australia was downplaying
concerns about human rights and the erosion of law in its smaller
Pacific neighbor, where more than 500 men, women and children who
had sought asylum in Australia are held.
In emailed comments to Reuters, a spokeswoman for Foreign Minister
Julie Bishop rejected the view that a desire to maintain the
detention center outweighed human rights concerns, and stressed that
Bishop raised such matters directly with President Waqa "on several
occasions last year."
"The Australian government's position in relation to the Regional
Processing Centre on Nauru has no bearing on the stance we take on
domestic human rights issues in Nauru," the spokeswoman said.
 Several documents among the 115 pages released to Reuters on
Wednesday show Department of Foreign Affairs officials advising
staff and ministers to deliver a muted response to events in Nauru.
For instance, weeks after Nauru ordered its sole Internet provider
to block access to Facebook in April 2015, which critics including
former Nauru Chief Justice Geoffrey Eames said was an attempt to
stifle dissent, Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs advised
officials to call political debate there "robust", a May 14 document
showed.
In talking points prepared by the department for staff including
Bishop, officials are directed to defend Nauru's rights to make new
laws if asked about the ban by journalists. "Nauru is a sovereign
nation able to establish its own legalframework," the document says.
Weeks earlier, Nauru Justice Minister David Adeang initially
explained the Facebook block on the grounds of limiting access to
child pornography. In May, Nauru made it illegal to make a statement
"likely to threaten national defense, public safety, public order,
public morality or public health", punishable by up to seven years
in prison.
The Nauru government declined to comment on what it called "internal
matters of the Australian government," spokeswoman Joanna Olsson
said in response to Reuters queries, adding "any suggestion that the
rule of law is not respected in Nauru is false."
POLITICAL TURMOIL
In 2010, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) began investigating an
Australian company, Getax, over allegations it paid bribes to
Nauruan officials to secure more favorable rates for Nauruan
phosphate.
In June 2015, the Australian Broadcasting Corp, citing leaked
emails, reported that the investigation involved a former Getax
official paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to Waqa
and Adeang.
In talking points about both allegations of human rights abuses and
corruption at Getax, Bishop, the prime minister's office and other
Australian senior ministers are instructed by the Department of
Foreign Affair's Pacific Affairs Division to respond to the question
of what the allegations mean for the bilateral relationship.
[to top of second column] |
"I expect Australia's good relations with Nauru to continue," say
the talking points in a June 10 document. "Our longstanding
bilateral relationship covers trade, people to people links and
cooperation on regional and international challenges, including
people smuggling."
Olsson, the Nauru government spokeswoman, said the government was
not aware of any AFP investigation. She added the corruption claims
had been "dealt with and found baseless".
An AFP spokesman said the Getax investigation is ongoing. A
spokeswoman for Getax declined to comment. Reuters was unable to
reach Waqa, Adeang or the Getax official, or to independently
confirm the accusations.
A Nauru government spokesman previously said the accusations were "a
slur on the character of our president and offensive to our nation."
PROTESTS, ARRESTS
Another FOI document dated June 24 advised senior officials how to
respond after protests related to the suspension of three opposition
lawmakers outside Nauru's parliament last June resulted in the
arrest of the lawmakers.
If asked: "Is the Australian government ignoring the erosion of law
in Nauru?", acceptable answers included: "It is understandable that
the protests ... are attracting some attention" and "We recognize
and respect that these are domestic issues for Nauru."
Jenny Hayward-Jones, a regional expert at Sydney think-tank the Lowy
Institute, said it was in Australia's interest to maintain the
asylum seeker center on Nauru and keep the government there
operating as effectively as possible.
"To do that, I think the Australian government assesses that it's
better not to criticize the Nauru government," she said.
The FOI documents were heavily redacted, in many cases citing an
exemption where disclosure could damage Australia's international
relations. In redacted notes regarding a call from Bishop to Waqa
dated Sept. 3, Bishop notes "continuing strong interest" in the
arrest of the opposition lawmakers, and adds she is "encouraged to
hear that legal hearings are progressing."
On the same day, New Zealand suspended NZ$1.2 million ($801,600) in
annual aid for Nauru's law and justice sector citing concerns about
"civil rights abuses."
(Reporting by Matt Siegel; Editing by Ian Geoghegan and Lincoln
Feast)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
