2012/01: Australian nationals taken hostage: Are the policies and actions of the Australian government adequate?
What they said...
'To the Australian embassy here in the Philippines, this is your constituent appealing for his life and safety ... If I'm given my last wish, my last wish is to please help me out of here alive please Madame Ambassador.'
Part of kidnap victim Warren Rodwell's plea for help
'It is not helpful to Mr Rodwell's interests to go into detail on the operational handling of this case.'
A spokesperson for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
The issue at a glance
On December 5, 2011, Australian national, Warren Rodwell, 53, was seized from his home in the town of Ipil, on the southern Philippine island of Mindanao.
On January 5, 2012, a video recording was released showing Mr Rodwell pleading for his family and the Australian government to secure his life through the payment of a $2 million ransom. The Australian government has an established policy of not paying ransoms as it argues that to do so encourages further kidnaps.
Mr Rodwell's plight has once more focused attention on how the Australian government deals with the kidnapping of Australian nationals living or travelling overseas.
On August 23, 2008, Nigel Brennan, a photo journalist, was kidnapped with Canadian journalist, Amanda Lindhout, and a number of Somali nationals on 23 outside Mogadishu, Somali. The hostage takers demanded a multi-million dollar ransom which the Australian government refused to pay.
The Somali nationals were released in January 2009. Mr Brennan and Ms Lindhout were released on 25 November 2009 after their families engaged a private security firm and paid a ransom of around US$600,000.
The Brennan's were subsequently highly critical of the manner in which the Australian government, and in particular, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, handled Mr Brennan's kidnap. They considered the government's policies inflexible and claimed they were not kept informed and were not treated with consideration.
Following these accusations, there was a Senate inquiry conducted in 2011, which made eight recommendations as to how the Australian government might manage such situations better in the future.
Background
(The following information is extracted from the 2011 Senate inquiry titled, 'Held Hostage: Government's response to kidnapping of Australian citizens overseas'. The full text of this Senate report can be found at http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/fadt_ctte/kidnap_ransom/report/report.pdf)
Australians kidnapped overseas
Being kidnapped and held for ransom is an on-going threat for many Australians who live, work and travel abroad.
The majority of Australians who have been kidnapped and held for ransom overseas since 1994 have been in Africa, particularly in Nigeria where a large number of Australians are employed in the oil industry. Australians have also been kidnapped in Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, Colombia, Cambodia, Yemen, Russia, Turkey and India.
Most Australians who have been taken hostage have been released. However, a number have died including Andrew Thirsk, kidnapped with a tour group in Yemen in 1998 and killed during the rescue attempt by Yemeni government forces, and David Wilson and Kellie Wilkinson separately kidnapped and murdered by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia in 1994.
There have been at least 30 reported kidnapping incidents involving Australians overseas since the deaths of Kellie Wilkinson and David Wilson.
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) has listed 11 cases that it was aware of dating from 1996 (DFAT acknowledges that there may be other cases that have been resolved without any request for government assistance). Information from newspaper reports and press releases suggests a further 20 cases of Australians being kidnapped overseas in that period.
The reported kidnapping incidents involving Australians that have occurred over the last seven years in chronological order are:
2004-Iraq: Robert Colvill, an American-Australian sound engineer for NBC was kidnapped with three colleagues in Fallujah. He was released three days later after the NBC reportedly paid a ransom.
2004-Iraq: Two Australian security guards were reportedly taken hostage with their clients by a group known as the 'Horror Brigades of the Islamic Secret Army' in September. The group demanded that Australian forces be withdrawn from Iraq. The kidnapping was never confirmed but media reports stated that an SAS team was dispatched to Iraq and that an AFP team specially trained for hostage crises in the Middle-East was on standby.
2004-Iraq: John Martinkus, journalist, kidnapped with two local companions outside his hotel in Baghdad and held for 20 hours by Sunni insurgents before being released.
2005-Iraq: Douglas Wood, engineer, kidnapped with two Iraqi colleagues on 30 April in Baghdad by the Shura Council of the Mujahadeen of Iraq. The hostage takers demanded that Australian forces leave Iraq. An 'emergency response' team was dispatched from Australia to Iraq. Wood was released by Iraqi forces during a 'random' operation on 15 June 2005. His two colleagues had been killed at an earlier date by the hostage takers.
2005-Gaza: Brian Ambrosio, deputy principal at a private American school, was kidnapped with a Dutch colleague in December by a group connected to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. He was released unharmed after being held for two days.
2006-Gaza: Kaye Bennett and Oles Shchyrytsya were abducted with seven other foreigners at the American International School at Beit Lahiya in Gaza. They were held for two hours before being released at a nearby police station after the captors determined that none of the hostages was American.
2007-Nigeria: Jason Lane, oil worker, was kidnapped with four other foreign contractors on 4 July from an oil rig operated by Shell in the Niger Delta. The hostages were released after seven days.
2007-Mali: Des Gregor, farmer, was kidnapped after travelling to Bamako to meet a woman he had met over the internet whom he believed would be his bride. He was held by a criminal gang who demanded a ransom of $100,000 from Mr Gregor's friends and family in Australia. Mr Gregor was held for 12 days before AFP negotiators persuaded the kidnappers that there was money to be collected by the captive from the Canadian Embassy in Bamako. The gang released Mr Gregor near the embassy and he was rescued by police.
2008-09-Somalia: an Australian with dual nationality kidnapped with colleagues working for an NGO. Their employer conducted negotiations with the support of a private security firm and the hostages were released after an estimated ransom of US$4.1 million was paid. The family requested that his Australian nationality not be disclosed at any point in the negotiations.
2008-09-Somalia: Nigel Brennan, photo journalist, kidnapped with Canadian journalist, Amanda Lindhout, and a number of Somali nationals on 23 August 2008 outside Mogadishu. Hostage takers demanded a multi-million dollar ransom. Somali nationals were released in January 2009. Brennan and Lindhout were released on 25 November 2009 after their families engaged a private security firm and paid ransom of around US$600,000.
2009-The Gambia: Justin Liebig, lured by a scam and kidnapped on 2 February. He was freed on 10 February after a reported ?5,000 in ransom was paid. DFAT and the Australian Federal Police officers were reportedly sent to The Gambia to assist with investigations. Gambian police arrested the kidnappers and recovered most of the ransom.
2011-East Africa: Australian ship captain with dual nationality taken hostage with crew by Somali pirates in February. Captain, crew and vessel were released two months later after ransom was paid by the shipping company.
2011- Philippines: Warren Rodwell was taken from his home on the southern island of Mindanao on December 5 and has appeared in a video pleading for his family and authorities to raise $2 million for his release.
Internet information
The full text of the November, 2011, Senate inquiry 'Held Hostage: Government's response to kidnapping of Australian citizens overseas' can be found at http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/fadt_ctte/kidnap_ransom/report/report.pdf
The report includes the inquiry's eight recommendations and detailed comment from former kidnap victims and spokespeople for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
On December 13, 2011, ABC Radio reported on Dr Bob East's view that media blackouts could damage the position of kidnap victims. The full text of this report and an audio link can be found at http://blogs.radioaustralia.net.au/english/2011/asia/news-blackout-on-australian-kidnap-victim-unnecessary-expert
On January 5, 2012, Greens Senator Bob Brown urged the government to put the family of kidnap victim Warren Rodwell in touch with professional ransom negotiators. The full text of this SBS report can be accessed at http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1616603/connect-hostage-family-to-experts-brown
On January 5, 2012, ABC Radio National's AM program presented an interview with former kidnap victim Nigel Brennan in which he criticised the policies of the Australian government when handling kidnappings.
A full audio recording of the interview can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-05/brennan-says-govt-needs-to-do-more-to-help-kidnap/3760210
On January 5, 2012, news.com.au reported the Australian government's statement that it would not pay ransom in the case of recent kidnap victim Nigel Rodwell. The full text of this report can be found at http://www.news.com.au/world/kidnapped-aussie-pleads-for-his-life/story-e6frfkyi-1226236989968
On January 6, 2012, The Sydney Morning Herald published an editorial titled, 'Paying the price of risk'. The editorial considers the difficulties associated with any kidnap negotiations. The full text of this editorial can be accessed at http://m.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/paying-the-price-of-risk-20120105-1pmq6.html#shortcuts
Arguments against the manner in which the Australian government handles hostage situations
1. The government's policy is too inflexible
Though few appear to be arguing that the Australian government should automatically pay ransoms, there are those who argue that the current policy is too inflexible. That is, they maintain, not only does the government not pay ransoms, it also does not negotiate, nor assist others who might wish to do so. In this, it is claimed, it is largely leaving the unfortunate kidnap victim to his or her fate.
A former kidnap victim, Mr Nigel Brennan, has stated, 'It is blindingly clear to me the Australian government's current "no ransom, no negotiation" policy must be changed...
To do nothing, as is the Australian government's policy now, is to condemn the next Australian hostage to death. That cannot be a rational, sensible or morally defensible Australian government policy.
By offering the kidnappers no hope of receiving any payment for keeping the kidnapped person alive and returning them home safely, the kidnappers have no incentive to do so.'
Mr Brennan has claimed that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade was reluctant to be seen to negotiate on behalf of the family and, as such, it adopted what he called a 'do nothing policy (which) added over a year to my captivity'.
It has been suggested that though the Australian government may not wish to offer ransoms or negotiate, it could help to make it possible for families and others connected with kidnap victims to make contact with experts who can act on their behalf.
An editorial published in The Sydney Morning Herald on January 6, 2012, stated, 'Canberra could take a more supportive approach. While the government is right to refuse to use taxpayers' money to pay ransoms, victims and their families should be assisted in making contact with experienced international security firms which can provide expert third-party negotiators and advice. It is not governments that should solely determine the handling of a kidnapping case. A "no ransom" policy need not be at odds with officials assisting family, friends and supporters in doing anything they believe can help secure a kidnap victim's safe release.'
2. The government does not communicate adequately with families
Another recommendation called for better communication between the government and the victim's family and the media.
Former kidnap victim, Mr Nigel Brennan, is strongly critical of Mr Stephen Smith, the Australian foreign minister and Mr Kevin Rudd, the former prime minister, both of whom he said refused to respond to his family's letters and phone calls.
'[Mr] Smith was tardy, dissembling and eventually blatantly dishonest to my family in regards to the official Australian-Canadian Government strategy, which was in play in late December 2008,'' Mr Brennan has written in his submission to a Senate inquiry.
Mr Brennan has also specifically criticised the then prime minister, Kevin Rudd. Mr Brennan has stated, 'The prime minister ignored the family during the entire time I was held captive until my mother confronted him in Bundaberg on the 23rd July, 2009. At that time he told my mother that he had "spent more time on my case than any other in the past year", though then he could not recall my name.'
Mr Brennan has further claimed that the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFAT) refused to hand over information to the private contractors his family had hired. 'They said it was because of security concerns... By not having that information it probably prolonged my time held hostage.'
3. The government does not give families sufficient support
It has been claimed that the Australian government gives the kidnap victims' families inadequate administrative support and does not keep them informed.
With regard to the withholding of information from families, a separate submission to the 2011 Senate inquiry from Nigel Brennan's family accuses the government of trying to keep the family 'in check' by not fully informing them of events.
The submission states, 'The Brennan family suspects that the general opinion of the government was that of the Brennan family being dumb, uneducated farmers and accordingly [that they] should be kept ill-informed and ignorant of Nigel's situation and the situation in Somalia.'
Mr Brennan noted that no government agency explained to him or his family which departments or agencies, aside from DFAT and the AFP, were involved in the operation, how they interacted and coordinated their activities, their role, functions and strategies.
The Brennan's have also claimed they were given conflicting advice by different government agencies. Mr Brennan has stated that DFAT made clear that it would not pay a ransom or facilitate a ransom while, at the same time, the AFP was asking his family 'its net worth and was telling them to liquidate assets to pay a ransom.'
Mr Brennan's sister, Nicole Bonney, stated that on day seven of her brother's incarceration, the family received a directive through the AFP negotiators stationed in the family home 'to acquire as much instant cash as possible'. Such action directly contradicted advice given to the family 'clearly and repeatedly that the Australian government does not pay ransoms'.
Kidnap victims have also argued that exceptions need to be made under the Australian criminal code which would make it possible for families to pay ransoms. Former kidnap victim Dr Donald Wood has questioned why 'relevant provisions of Australia's Criminal Code...make no allowance for exceptional circumstances such as a family member's kidnapping for ransom'.
Dr Wood argues that in circumstances such as his family's, 'the Australian Criminal Code should not imperil citizens initiating action with their bank, reasonably, openly and in good faith, to withdraw or transmit their own money.' Dr Woods has suggested that a clause be inserted in the legislation that would 'allow a government minister or delegate to authorise a bank in special cases to do what the Code would ordinarily prohibit'.
4. The government deals poorly with the media
Some critics have argued that the Australian government's usual attempts to keep the media's treatment of kidnappings to a minimum may actually act against the kidnap victims.
Bob East, from the University of Southern Queensland, who has written a PhD dissertation and other research papers on the insurgencies in the southern Philippines, has argued that the media should be free to report all aspects of the kidnapping.
Dr East has stated, 'If the kidnappers believe their hostage is unimportant then his chances of survival are indeed minimal. After all, if the prime reason for the kidnapping is profit, and there is no profit to be made, then there is no point in keeping their quarry.'
A more open approach was supported by The Herald Sun in an editorial published on January 6, 2012. The editorial states, 'If the kidnappers are aware their demands are being considered, there is less likelihood they will harm their hostage...
The Herald Sun therefore encourages the Gillard Government to keep the public as well as Mr Rodwell's family better informed.'
A spokesperson for the Australian Federal Police has also stated that some media coverage of overseas kidnaps can act as a valuable warning to other Australians travelling in different countries.
The AFP spokesperson stated, 'If it is general media covering the incident, it can indeed be useful to warn others of a similar fate, particularly where there are travel warnings put out by DFAT in relation to particular countries...So there can indeed by some value in the coverage of cases.'
There are also those who have argued that the Australian government makes little use of the media in hostage cases in part as a means of protecting its agencies from criticism. Nicole Bonney, Nigel Brennan's sister, 'DFAT appears to have an adverse reaction to media especially if it appears to reflect badly on DFAT who it would appear endeavours to shut it down to save face. Yet DFAT used the guise of safety of the hostages to achieve this aim.'
The 2011 Senate inquiry, looking at the Australian government's handling of kidnap cases, accepted that there was room for improvement in the government's dealings with the media. One of the inquiry's recommendations states, 'That DFAT examine ways to improve its relationship with the media when dealing with a kidnapping situation and how it explains its media strategy to media organisations and family members at the outset of a crisis.'
5. The government does not have sufficient expertise
There are those who have argued that the Australian government needs to develop greater expertise in dealing with international kidnappings. Others incompetence of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade means that the government should facilitate the passing on of these cases to trained professionals.
A 2011 senate inquiry into international kidnapping and the Australian government's response included among its recommendations a call to provide specially trained personal to respond to incidences such as overseas kidnappings. It recommended the development of a whole-of-government coordinating group and made a series of further recommendations to ensure that this group had appropriate expertise.
Included in its recommendations are 'regular meetings and keeping up-to-date with global developments in kidnapping and hostage taking; ... ensuring that there is a pool of specially trained personnel across all relevant agencies ready to respond to an incident such as a kidnapping abroad;... the training of ... [a] pool of specialists that places a high priority on continuous improvement in interagency coordination and cooperation through joint training programs and workshops...'
The senate inquiry also recommended that the government assist families who wished to contact professional kidnapping consultants. This course has been supported by a number of kidnap victims. Former kidnap victim Nigel Brennan stated, 'The government needs to recognise that they don't have the experience and they should be passing negotiations on to kidnapping companies.'
Arguments in favour of the manner in which the Australian government handles hostage situations
1. The Australian government adheres to international protocols in not paying ransoms
The Australian government's policy of not paying ransoms is in accord with that supported throughout the international community.
The United Nations has denounced hostage-taking and expressed its objection to the payment of ransoms.
The United Nations General Assembly adopted the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages on 17 December 1979, which entered into force on 3 June 1983. It requires member states to make hostage-taking an offence punishable by appropriate penalties and to take all appropriate measures to ease the situation of hostages and to facilitate their release.
The United Nations General Assembly adopted the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism on 9 December 1999 . The convention, which entered into force on 10 April 2002, recognises the urgent need 'to enhance international cooperation among States in devising and adopting effective measures for the prevention of the financing of terrorism as well as for its suppression through the prosecution and punishment of its perpetrators'.
Australia is a party to this convention and as such the payment of a ransom in relation to an Australian citizen kidnapped overseas could raise issues about compliance with the convention.
In accord with these United Nations conventions, Australia has taken the necessary measures under its domestic legislation to establish criminal offences relating to kidnapping, the financing of terrorist activities and to make those offences punishable by appropriate penalties.
The Australian government would consider paying a ransom in breach of its international obligations and an offence under Australian law. (It has similarly been argued that any other individual paying a ransom may be considered guilty of providing financial support to terrorists.)
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has stated, 'The no ransom policy remains the cornerstone of our approach. It has been the consistent policy of successive Australian governments and is shared by our likeminded consular partners-namely, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.'
2. Paying ransoms encourages further kidnappings
The Australian Government's key policy in relation to the kidnapping of Australian citizens overseas is that the government does not pay ransoms.
This policy is made clear in Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's 'General Advice to Australian Travellers', made available on its Smartraveller website. The advice states, 'The Australian Government's longstanding policy is that it does not make payments or concessions to kidnappers. The Australian Government considers paying ransoms increases the risk of further kidnappings.'
The Australian government acknowledges that kidnap for ransom can be a lucrative undertaking and the payment of ransom by any party creates an incentive for individuals and groups to engage in kidnapping. The government's prime rationale in not paying ransoms is to avoid creating any incentive for Australian citizens to be kidnapped. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has stated, 'To do otherwise would only encourage the kidnapping of Australians and the kidnapping-for-ransom business more generally.'
This policy has generally been supported by kidnap victims. Kidnapping victim, Nigel Brennan, has stated, 'In the press it has been construed that I expected the Australian government to pay a ransom. That is actually incorrect. Even before being kidnapped, I did not expect the government to pay a ransom, as that endangers the lives of other Australian citizens.'
Mr Brennan's sister, Nicole Bonney, has also written, 'In reality we would agree that governments should not pay ransom as it encourages the practice; however, we are aware that some governments do exactly this.'
Another relation of a kidnap victim has stated, 'The merest hint that the Australian government may become involved in the ransoming of kidnap victims makes me apprehensive, because of the perception in the minds of some people that this is an indication that any ransom will be underwritten by our government, rather than an impecunious foreigner.'
3. The Australian government supports families as much as it can
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has maintained that it both aware of the needs of families in hostage situations and offers all the support it can.
In a submission made to the 2011 Senate inquiry into the Australian government's handling of kidnappings, the Department stated, 'Communicating with, and providing information to, victims' families is one of the most important roles for consular services in emergencies such as kidnappings.
Families learning of the kidnapping of a loved one experience a range of emotions-shock, anguish, frustration and confusion-which continue as the days, weeks and in some cases months pass. Naturally, throughout this ordeal, they will feel as though they have no control over the situation. Their distress, grief and sense of helplessness will affect the way they relate to others including the consular and police officers involved in the kidnapping situation. Assisting the family through this traumatic period requires special skills and careful attention.'
The Australian government has rejected the characterisation of it offered by Nigel Brennan and his family as unsupportive during Mr Brennan's kidnapping.
A spokesperson for the Foreign Minister has stated, 'Mr Rudd respects the courage and the tireless efforts of the Brennan family in securing the release of Nigel Brennan.'
The Prime Minister's office has further stated, 'As prime minister, Mr Rudd was regularly briefed on the case by then foreign minister Smith and officials, both in writing and in person. Because of its importance, the case was also reviewed by National Security Committee of Cabinet. Mr Rudd was actively involved in these discussions and decisions together with the responsible minister and officials.
Action by the government included a taskforce of up to ten officers from the AFP, the ADF and DFAT deployed to the High Commission in Nairobi to assist with efforts to secure Nigel's release (Nairobi Taskforce), and a separate taskforce of DFAT officers in Canberra working exclusively on the case (Somalia Taskforce).'
4. The Australian government co-operates with the media in order to keep information from the kidnappers
In its submission to the inquiry, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade explained its approach to media and publicity in kidnapping cases, 'In most kidnapping cases, it is helpful to keep the situation out of the public eye as far as possible. This assists in managing the kidnappers' expectations of a ransom: kidnappers will routinely monitor media, particularly reports of public and government comment on a case, to gauge the response to their demands and whether there is pressure on the government to comply.
Rather than attempting to enforce a media blackout, cooperation with media outlets and providing an explanation of the merits of this approach is genuinely effective. This voluntary media self-censorship has been applied in other countries' cases as well.'
This position has been endorsed by the current Opposition leader, Mr Tony Abbott. Mr Abbott has stated, 'A human life is in the balance and I think the less public commentary the better.'
5. The situation in the country where an Australian is held captive may limit the government's capacity to achieve a release
Kidnappings often occur in areas experiencing economic and political turmoil, where law and order is weak and corruption is widespread. Kidnappings also often occur in jurisdictions where Australia has little or no diplomatic or official representation. The avenues for direct intervention may be too dangerous or attempts to exercise diplomatic influence may be unproductive.
A hostage situation involving an Australian citizen overseas presents many challenges for the government. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has stressed that any response will be determined by the circumstances prevailing in the individual situation.
The Australian government has also indicated that Australian citizens have a responsibility not to travel in countries where they are likely to be held to ransom. A Herald Sun editorial published on January 6, 2012, stated, 'An exasperated secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Dennis Richardson, recently warned Australian travellers that overstretched consular officials could not bail out every traveller, given the sharp rise in adventure tourism and an apparent willingness by Australians to ignore travel warnings for the world's "no go" danger zones.'
Further implications
As a number of authorities have noted, there is no simple solution when dealing with the kidnapping of an Australian national in another jurisdiction. The perpetrators of the crime are likely to be difficult to deal with. Further, there is general agreement that for a government to pay a ransom only increases the likelihood that more Australians will be kidnapped.
Therefore most governments, including Australia's, adopt the policy of refusing to pay ransoms. This leaves them in the awkward position of attempting to negotiate a kidnap victim's release, while not giving the kidnappers what they want.
Given the difficulty of the situation it is surprising that only three Australian kidnap victims are known to have been killed by their captors since 1994. Despite this, a range of criticisms have been made of the manner in which the Australian government conducts these negotiations.
Chief among these criticisms is that Australia does not facilitate families who wish to ransom their kidnapped family members. Australian anti-terrorist laws make it an offence to supply financial support to terrorists. These laws act as an impediment to those who wish to ransom a kidnap victim. Some claim that exceptions should be made in the case of those paying ransoms.
The 2011 Senate inquiry recommended that the Australian government put the families of kidnap victims into contact with professional kidnap negotiators. This amounts to the tacit endorsement of privately paid ransoms. The difficulty with this as an official government policy is that, irrespective of whether private or government funds are used to pay a ransom, the more often a ransom is paid the more likely it is someone else will be taken hostage.
All governments are left in the dreadful situation of balancing the wellbeing of a current kidnap victim against the need to protect all potential victims.
Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
AGE, December 12, 2011,AGE, January 10, 2012, page 5, news item by Murdoch and Jacinto, `Captors thwart rescue attempt'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/captors-thwart-rescue-attempt-20120109-1prva.html
AGE, January 6, 2012, page 1, news item by Murdoch and Jacinto, `Philippines rules out ransom talks over held Australian'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/philippines-rules-out-ransom-talks-over-held-australian-20120105-1pmyo.html
H/SUN, January 5, 2012, page 4, news item, `Aussie begs for ransom to be paid'.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/kidnapped-aussie-wounded-says-military/story-fn7x8me2-1226236894437
AGE, January 5, 2012, page 1, news item (photo) by Murdoch and Jacinto, `$US2m ransom on Australian's life'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/us2m-ransom-on-australians-life-20120104-1pla7.html
AGE, January 3, 2012, page 1, news item by Lindsay Murdoch, `Kidnap victim "frail" in photo'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/kidnap-victim-frail-in-photo-20120102-1pigk.html
AGE, December 12, page 3, news item by Lindsay Murdoch, `Kidnap blackout unwise: expert'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/kidnap-blackout-unwise-expert-20111211-1oprq.html
AGE, December 8, 2011, page 4, news item by Lindsay Murdoch, `Kidnapped man shot in foot during struggle'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/kidnapped-man-shot-in-foot-during-struggle-20111207-1ojba.html
AUST, December 7, 2011, page 7, news item (photo) by Brendan Nicholson, `PM's taskforce to track Aussie kidnap victim'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/pms-taskforce-to-track-aussie-kidnap-victim-in-the-philippines/story-e6frg6nf-1226215612151
AGE, December 7, 2011, page 3, news item (photo) by Lindsay Murdoch, `Sydney man abducted in Philippines believed shot'.
http://newsstore.fairfax.com.au/apps/viewDocument.ac;jsessionid=F0F7D7578ADDDA71D3FD5061CABFEB3F?sy=nstore&pb=all_ffx&dt=selectRange&dr=1month&so=relevance&sf=text&sf=headline&rc=10&rm=200&sp=brs&cls=1954&clsPage=1&docID=AGE111207I33L55BAD86