Right: A memorial service held by the surfing fraternity. Participants included Indonesians, as well as foreigners.
Arguments against the execution of the Bali bombers
1. The survivors of the bombing and the relatives of those killed may be distressed by the executions
Numbers of the survivors of the Bali bombings together with many of the relatives of victims of the bombings have indicated that they were upset by the executions.
A number of Queenslanders were killed or seriously injured in the 2002 Bali bombings. After the executions The Illawarra Mercury opposed the terrorists' deaths and quoted a number of relatives of victims who appeared to have gained no comfort from them.
The Illawarra Mercury article stated, 'The Bali bombers execution by a firing squads has provided little relief for South Coast families who lost loved ones in the bombings six years ago...'
One of those quoted by the Illawarra Mercury was Gayle Dunn, who lives at Ulladulla , in Queensland and lost her son when he died as a result of the Bali bombings. However, Ms Dunn claims the the executions of those who killed her son .have given her no comfort. 'Nothing is ever going to bring them back. You are never going to see them grow old... There is never closure because they are never coming home,' Ms Dunn said.
In an interview given to the Sydney Morning Herald, Ms Dunn further stated, 'I don't believe two wrongs make a right. I am afraid there might be [violent acts of retribution] and I would hate to see any family go through what we have been through.'
Georgia Lysaght, of Wollongong, who lost her older brother Scott Lysaght said her family never felt vengeful because nothing would ever bring back Scott. 'The fact that it has happened doesn't bring Scott back. It doesn't change what's happened, it doesn't bring any sense of closure," she said. 'It doesn't make me feel that justice has been served. The only just thing to do would to be able to see my brother again, and that is not going to happen.'
Brian Deegan is an Adelaide magistrate, whose son, Joshua, was killed in the Bali bombings. Mr Deegan is an opponent of capital punishment and the executions of the three bombers has only caused him further distress. He has stated, 'It's not about saving Amrozi, it's not about saving Samundra. If they died of natural causes I would not think about them.
What I am concerned about is this: I am absolutely against capital punishment in any form for any reason. I am tired of reading about young women being stoned to death in Iran and Iraq and other countries for lesser offences. I know there are young boys on death row in Indonesia for lesser offences ...
The thought that it is occurring somehow in connection with myself and my family is abhorrent to me. The deaths of these individuals will never bring back my beautiful son. The closure it will bring is not going to heal the wound, it's going to ulcerate it.'
2. The executions follow one form of killing with another, violating international law and the Indonesian Constitution
There are those who believe that state-sanctioned killings, such as the execution of those convicted of capital offences are as wrong as the crimes the executions seek to punish. According to this line of argument, if it were wrong for the Bali bombers to take the lives of other human beings, it is also wrong for the Indonesian legal system and the Indonesian government to take the bombers' lives.
The day after the Bali bombers were executed, the human rights group, Amnesty International, issued a public statement declaring that the execution of the Bali bombers should be the last time Indonesian authorities use the death penalty.
Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific director, stated, 'The Bali Bombers perpetrated a horrific atrocity. But to continue the cycle of violence through state sanctioned killings is to answer the violation of human rights with further violations.'
Amnesty International states, 'The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state. It is a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment that violates the right to life as proclaimed in the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights.'
It has also been noted that in imposing the death penalty in these three instances, the Indonesian Government violated its own constitution as well as international law. The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 62/149 of 18 December 2007 calls for a moratorium on executions. The death sentences of Amrozi, Ghufron and Samudera also violate Article 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ratified by Indonesia in 2006) as well as the Indonesian Constitution - both of which ban the retroactive application of criminal laws. The three were tried and sentenced to death under the Law on Combating Criminal Acts of Terrorism, brought into force after the 2002 bombings. Nevertheless the Indonesian Supreme Court rejected the three men's appeal on these grounds in 2007.
3. The executions are likely to give the bombers the status of martyrs
It has been suggested that executing three of the Bali bombers will merely make them martyrs to their cause for those who support their cause. The concern is that their deaths will add to their prestige and will therefore others to emulate them. Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, on hearing the death sentence imposed on him and two others declared, 'I'll be happy to die a martyr. After me there will be a million Amrozis.' The phrase has become popularised and a number of Islamic militants warned prior to the execution of the Bali bombers that their deaths would create 'a million Amrozis'.
On November 4, 2008, the New Zealand newspaper, The Press, published an editorial which stated, 'And if the aim of the executions is to deter others from staging terrorist attacks, the opposite could in fact occur...executing Samudra, Amrozi and Mukhlas will only turn them into martyrs and help to persuade others to resort to violence. There are already warnings that, when news of the executions is released, there could be a wave of attacks directed at foreigners and Indonesian targets.
A better strategy would be to leave the three to rot away in a prison cell, where they would not be a focus of news media coverage and far less likely to inspire other militants to emulate their terrorist actions.'
The Illawarra Mercury also published an editorial argue that the executions would only create martyrs and prompt further violence among the terrorists. The editorial states, 'incarceration, not delivering three new martyrs to the cause of jihad, would have been a better course.
While much has been done to fragment and lessen the impact of terror cells in South-East Asia, it is clear the executions will now give a new focal point to those who would seek to perpetuate the harm against Australians abroad.'
The same position has been taken by the human rights organisation Amnesty International. The organisation says that there is no reliable evidence that the death penalty deters future criminal acts, and in this particular case, the executions may only serve to perpetuate such atrocities. There is a serious risk that the executions will turn the bombers from murderers to martyrs, whose memories will be used to increase support and recruitment to their cause. As the executions approach, the three men themselves have made very public calls for their supporters to seek retribution for their deaths
4. The executions may make Australian and other Western tourists more of a target for Muslim extremists
Immediately prior to the execution of three of the Bali bombers, Australia, New Zealand, Britain, and the United States issued warnings to their citizens against travel to Indonesia.
These governments were concerned that revenge attacks might follow the terrorists' execution. Far from showing remorse, the three members of the militant Islamist group Jemaah Islamiyah in their final days called for more attacks on Westerners.
The three convicted bombers were allowed to write open letters as they awaited execution. Their letters reveal that they anticipated that their deaths would intensify Muslim extremists' actions against t he West.
One of the three bombers, Samudra, wrote, ' You, the little people, will be easy to "smack down" by the mujahideen.You will be defeated in this world and will be taken to hell.
Who doesn't know that the toothless giant, the US infidel and their allies, are now dying.You think, if you execute the three of us, you can walk freely, there's no way. Remember: there's not one free Muslim blood drop!'
5. Executing the bombers leaves the militant religious and other leaders still free to preach their message
It has been claimed that executing the bombers is a misdirection of energy. There are those who argue that it would be far more effective to execute those who have planned, orchestrated and continue to encourage such attacks.
Singapore's senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew expressed the view that those who planned terrorist atrocities were the real source of the problem. He also suggested that in focusing on the perpetrators, the United States and others were misguided. Lee Kuan Yew stated, ' Americans ... make the mistake of seeking a largely military solution. You must use force. But force will only deal with the tip of the problem. In killing the terrorists, you will kill the worker bees. The queen bees are the preachers, who teach a deviant form of Islam in schools and Islamic centers, who capture and twist the minds of the young.'
On November 4, 2008, the New Zealand newspaper, The Press, published an editorial which made a similar point. The editorial stated, 'The Jemaah Islamiyah terrorist network, which planned the 2002 bombings, would have received a blow if the conviction of one of its reputed leaders, Abu Bakar Bashir, for involvement in the first Bali bombings had not been overturned. If the conviction had stood it would have sent a strong message about Indonesia's determination to stamp out Islamic militants and terrorism.'