Gajalakshmi Paramasivam – 11 May  2015

Vishu on Garuda By Raja Ravi Varma

Indonesia – Snake or Garuda?

The Independent article ‘Indonesian President Joko Widodo describes death penalty as 'positive' after Bali Nine executions’ came with the picture of Garuda (Eagle) – Lord Vishnu’s vehicle. Out of the Hindu Holy Trinity – Brammah, Vishnu & Shiva – Vishnu Protects Life – so we would maximize the use of our body towards realizing our Divinity. It is disappointing  that Indonesian Government which carries the Garuda Logo is not loyal to Protecting the Body. The Snake / Naagam around the neck of Lord Shiva symbolizes the shedding of the body as depicted by the snake  shedding its skin regularly.  Naagam is the food of Garuda. There is a Tamil song by Poet Kannathasan -  which goes as follows : [The Snake around the neck of Paramasivan (Lord Shiva) asked Garuda ‘Are you well?’].

Indonesian President Mr. Joko Widodo is playing the role of Snake even though he is required to be Garuda with far vision and protecting the body towards realizing the higher values of life. The problem is that this Snake is not protected by Paramasivan. Lord Shiva helps us lose Body Consciousness. One who is driven by killing the body prematurely would not be able to raise consciousness of it  to the higher level.  The actions of the Indonesian Government – in executing its prisoners even when they are not reformed – only gives a different form to the issue of drugs. Lord Vishnu in the form of  Krishna gave us the message that one could wage war and kill in combat as a last resort. Prior to that those in power have the responsibility to quietly absorb the losses due to irreconcilable differences . When they believe that all within their power has been done – then they can declare ‘war’ as Equals. Those who are sentenced to death while in the custody of the authorities concerned – are not Equals. Such deaths  like the change of skin by the Snake – which sheds one to take on a new one.  One who thinks that killing the body is the answer is disconnected to Indonesia’s traditional governance roots.

 As per the above article [Mr Widodo insisted he had no regrets about the executions and said: "The death penalty is still our positive law."]

If indeed executions were part of the LAW of the country – then it should not have been brought down to political level.   By bringing it down to political level – Mr. Widodo was confirming that law and order  system was not working.   Hence the cheap way of rousing emotions.

As per the above news report:

[The President defended the decision following after Gillian Trigg, the Australian Human Rights Commissioner, suggested that supplies of foreign aid should be altered in accordance with countries’ human rights record]

Foreign Aid is outside the Jurisdiction of the Australian Human Rights Commission. Each one of us has jurisdiction as per our respective positions. We need to first demonstrate our strength through those official positions before making suggestions as equal and free citizens.

Professor Andrew Byrnes of Australian Human Rights Centre, Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, in his article ‘The Bali 9 case – where has international law gone?’ states:

[Another option would be to propose referring the matter to the International Court of Justice. However, although Australia has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court, Indonesia has not. Nonetheless, it would be possible for Indonesia to agree to the Court hearing this particular case, but once again it will not do so if Australia does not propose it. In 1998 Indonesia was prepared to submit to the Court a dispute with Malaysia in relation to sovereignty over two small islands off Borneo. Of course, disputes over territory may be viewed as different to this type of case, and the fact that Malaysia won that case may also not be helpful in persuading Indonesia to this course of action.]

The Australian Human Rights Commission has a poor record in terms of using Discretionary Powers of the President which to my mind is the parallel of Clemency powers of the President of Indonesia. The Australian Human Rights Commission kept dismissing my complaints under Section 46 PH (1) (c ) which states:

The President may terminate a complaint on  the following grounds:

the President is satisfied that the complaint was trivial, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance;

I was sent to prison for waiting peacefully see the Vice Chancellor of the University of New South Wales and I filed complaints against both parties – the University of New South Wales and the NSW Police. A simple read of the Inclosed Lands Provision Act 1901 would have confirmed that the arrests were unlawful. How could dismissal of complaint by someone who suffered such pain and loss – for seeking to uphold her the dignity of her work – qualify as ‘trivial, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance?’  To me the dignity of my sovereignty as an individual was far more important than escaping the unlawful clutches of the University and Police authorities. They were trying to intimidate me  - so I would leave of my own accord. That was harassment.  I relied on my Truth and that Truth showed me the way beyond these official limits.  Hence my service to Bali 9 leaders through Myuran Sukumaran of my Community – so he also would uphold his dignity as a Sovereign Individual rather than submit and fear those who had the physical power to cause his death. I believe that Myuran raised himself to the higher level through his art. The parallel of that for me is my writing. That Truth alone can release us from bondage to external powers. Myuran’s brother’s account of his exchanges with Myuran confirm that Myuran did not fear death of  his body.  In some ways Truth becomes our Guru when we look beyond the immediate.

The real Human Rights value  of a Nation is the consolidated value of investments made by its citizens of their own free will in Human Rights. The rest – including the Human Rights Commission and its structures are for economic and status purposes. The Australian Human Rights Commission wronged in regards to at least one Australian citizen’s sovereignty.  One of those protect by the Commission was Mr. Howard about whose  Government the following was said exactly 10 years back in relation to Bali 9:

[the Australian government has decided to turn the other cheek as nine Australian citizens confront the distinct possibility of the firing squad.] John Roberts – World Socialists Website.

Those of us who ‘protect’ our own are limited to local power. Truth is the Universal Power which will work to uphold our Sovereignty at all times. The Australian Human Rights Commission needs to clear its karma by identifying with its own Truth. Then it will naturally strengthen the Sovereign Powers of Australia.