Indonesia’s Bali Nine decision

Controversy surrounding the possible repatriation of the remaining five members of the Bali Nine drug-smuggling gang is no surprise. The humanitarian case for bringing them home, 19 years after they were arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment for attempting to smuggle 8.3kg of heroin from Bali to Australia, is strong.

No less relevant in Indonesia, however, are the apprehensions of those such as Bali MP Nyoman Patra, who has urged the country’s new President, Prabowo Subianto, to uphold tough laws on foreign nationals convicted of drug trafficking.

Indonesian Co-ordinating Minister for Legal Affairs, Human Rights, Immigration and Corrections Yusril Ihza Mahendra says Mr Prabowo is “reviewing and processing the matter” and “it is expected to be carried out in December”.

The contention in Indonesia following news of the possible repatriation of the five – Matthew Norman, Martin Stephens, Si Yi Chen, Scott Rush and Michael Czugaj – reflects recollections of the damage to international perceptions of Indonesia caused by the arrest, sentencing and subsequent execution by firing squad in 2015 of the gang’s two ringleaders, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.

While the humanitarian argument for bringing the Australians home after almost 20 years of imprisonment is strong and such a move would be welcome, the Albanese government also must be sensitive to difficulties that confront the new government in Jakarta. Indonesia’s harsh stand against drug smugglers is crucial to Australia’s own war on drugs.

Hailing possible repatriation of the five in the context of the government securing the releases of Sean Turnell from prison in Myanmar, journalist Cheng Lei from China and Julian Assange as some, such as The Sydney Morning Herald, have done is wrong.

There is no comparison between those detained on political grounds and drug smugglers whose crime was to attempt to bring deadly heroin into Australia.