Insufficient Evidence: The failure of New Zealand's national security apparatus to acquire the human intelligence (and thus the eye-witness evidence) to convince a jury of the defendants' guilt in the Urewera Terror Trial has exposed serious weakenesses in the protective institutions of the New Zealand State.
Salus populi suprema lex
The safety of the people shall be the highest law
Cicero
Salus populi suprema lex
The safety of the people shall be the highest law
Cicero
THE DECISION NOT TO RE-TRY the “Urewera Four” sets the capstone
on a comprehensive failure of New Zealand’s national security apparatus. At
almost every level, the public has witnessed examples of ignorance, indecision
and incompetence that agencies similarly placed in poorer and more marginalised
countries would look at askance. After the Urewera debacle, it is debateable
whether New Zealand even has a national security apparatus. That twenty or so
highly politicised individuals could be observed undertaking military training
with lethal weapons, on tribal lands with a long and strong tradition of
resistance to the New Zealand state, for close to a year, and still manage to
escape serious convictions, certainly argues against the proposition.
At the heart of this failure lies a paucity of intelligence.
(And I’m using the word here in its double sense of intellectual sophistication
and useable knowledge.) New Zealanders have been seriously let down by the
tradition of anti-intellectualism that pervades our security services. It has
fostered an institutional environment in which anyone possessing a
sophisticated understanding of this country’s history and culture is treated with
hostility and suspicion. Doubly so, if that knowledge extends to anything more
than a superficial grasp of left-wing and/or right-wing theory and practice.
It’s an environment in which the received “wisdom” of our (often even more ignorant)
American and Australian allies counts for much more than specialised local
knowledge.
Assistant Police Commissioner, Jon White’s, operationally
brutal and strategically idiotic raid on the sleepy Tuhoe village of Ruatoki
destroyed any chance the Crown might have had of mounting a successful
prosecution of the fledgling Urewera guerrilla force. The NZ Police utterly
underestimated the vigour and sophistication of the Left’s propaganda
capabilities and, from the very beginning, were forced to play “catch-up” in
the struggle for hearts and minds.
The other fatal flaw in Operation Eight was its (no doubt US
inspired) fascination and reliance on technologically acquired intelligence.
Neither the Police Security Intelligence Unit (PSIU) nor the Security
Intelligence Service (SIS), appear to have anything remotely resembling an
effective spy network. Indeed, in this regard, New Zealand’s private sector
intelligence gatherers seem to be well ahead of the State’s. This lack of human
intelligence drove the Police to what were subsequently deemed to be reckless
and illegal attempts to acquire persuasive evidence of criminal intent.
Also lacking were the reliable media “assets” so highly
prized by the British security services. Individuals to whom key elements of
the Crown’s case might have been judiciously leaked as a way of counter-acting
the Defence’s extremely skilful use of sympathetic journalists strategically
located throughout the news media. Our own security services appear utterly
unaware of the role social media and the Internet play in shaping public
opinion. Where, for example, was the Crown’s equivalent of Wikileaks? Clearly
no one was prepared to play the role of Private Bradley Manning by dumping all
the evidence denied to the Prosecution on a suitably insulated and legally
untouchable website.
From the very beginning of Operation Eight it should have
been clear that the Crown was engaged in a full-scale political battle with the
individuals behind the Urewera Training Camps and their supporters in the wider
left-wing community. Every one of the agencies tasked with protecting our
national security: the PSIU, the SIS, the Officials
Committee for Domestic and External Security Co-ordination (ODESC) and the Combined Threat Assessment
Group (CTAG) individually and collectively failed to meet this political test.
Bluntly, the accused’s’ defence team and their tireless army of propagandists ran
rings around the Crown. They not only won a significant political victory in
terms of the “Urewera Four” case, but their undeniable success in making the
Crown look both weak and stupid will very likely deter its servants from
attempting anything similar for many years to come. It will require a very
brave Police Commissioner indeed to repeat Howard Broad’s gutsy call of 2007.
Nor will Tuhoe, and the Maori nationalist movement generally,
be content to rest upon their laurels. Already we’re hearing demands for a
Crown apology to, and massive compensation for, the traumatised residents of
Ruatoki. Pressing forward from one victory towards another has always been an
intelligent strategy – both politically and militarily. The Crown, already in full
retreat, will be harried unceasingly by a Tuhoe nation intent on reclaiming as
much lost land and mana as possible.
The New Zealand State has been seriously weakened by its failure
to convince a jury that what was happening in the Ureweras constituted a clear
and present danger to our national security. The Crown’s prosecutors appeared almost
entirely ignorant of the philosophical, ideological and historical arguments
which have, in other parts of the world, persuaded hitherto peaceful
individuals to embrace the theory and practice of political violence. Where
were the Crown’s expert witnesses? Why were no academics from the USA or the UK
called to tell the Jury how and why people become terrorists? The defence team’s
carefully fostered notions that Tame Iti and his comrades posed no sort of
threat to the Queen’s Peace, and that the charges levelled against him were farcical,
were never adequately challenged by the prosecution – and they stuck.
Partly, this is explained by the failure of the Police to supply
the Crown with the right sort of evidence. But the prosecution’s ham-fisted use
of the evidence it did possess
reflected the susceptibility of even the Crown’s lawyers to the “two worlds”
argument advanced by the defence. The latter insisted, with all the silky
conviction a skilful barrister can muster, that events which looked like
military exercises when viewed through Pakeha eyes, appeared no more dangerous
than a job creation scheme when viewed through Maori eyes.
To insist that people running around with guns and
balaclavas were terrorists, warned the defence, was to revisit upon these noble
Maori “reformers” all the sins of our colonial fathers. According to their
lawyers, the accused weren’t training to be terrorists. No, they were training
to be security guards in Somalia and Iraq! This preposterous argument convinced
not only at least one of the jurors, but also, seemingly, the Crown itself. Guilty
verdicts on the most serious charges, it was cleverly insinuated, would be
proof positive that Pakeha racism had triumphed. Not surprisingly, on the most
serious charge - belonging to an illegal organisation - the Jury was hung.
Russel Fairbrother, Tame Iti’s lawyer, has hailed the
Crown’s decision not to re-try his client as a victory for the New Zealand
justice system. But there is another, much less sanguine, way of looking at the
Crown’s capitulation. If, under the rubric of “national security” one includes
the preservation of New Zealand as a unitary, constitutionally-coherent state
in which the safety of every citizen is guaranteed by the rule of law, and
where the state, and only the state,
is permitted to maintain and train armed forces, then the Crown’s decision, and
the lamentable way it has conducted itself throughout the entire Urewera affair,
gives cause for grave concern.
A group of armed individuals, who gave every appearance of
levying war against the Crown, have somehow escaped serious convictions. This
entirely unsatisfactory outcome sets an extremely dangerous precedent. We
should not feel in the least bit reassured that, ultimately, the guerrillas in
the Urewera mist failed to inflict any harm on their fellow citizens. Next time
(and given the extraordinary failings of our national security apparatus a ‘next
time’ cannot be discounted) we may not be so lucky.
This posting is
exclusive to the Bowalley Road
blogsite.
16 comments:
The outcome we got is because the public here is generally brainwashed into PC liberal muck. Noone is ever a criminal and apparently it was all harmless fun. Not! And how arrogant and smug the freed accused are. But the media is partly to blame, ultra PC. rabidly liberal and full of the no blame game. No wonder the Australians think we're a bunch of leftie loons on weed! Only in NZ. Elsewhere a jury would have convicted the perps to the full!
Is there something in the Marmite perhaps?
While Tame was involved in silly activities, all evidence produced so far doesn't point to his group being much of a threat.
A simple phone call may have averted this whole debacle and waste of enormous waste of money.
http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2011/09/tama-iti-terrorist.html
Look, pretty much everyone knows that Iti and company think of themselves as revolutionaries.
Pretty much everyone also knows exactly what they were doing. They were half playing at soldiers and half training for revolution.
Pretty much everyone also knows that insofar as they were playing at soldiers, it's not really a big deal, other than the firearms charges that they were rightly convicted on.
But we also all know that insofar as they were serious about actual revolution, they were delusional. They will never be revolutionaries, because... look at them. They aren't even anywhere near as credible as the American militia movement, and everyone knows what a bunch of hopeless, ineffectual dreamers those people are.
Groups like the Red Army Fraktion and the FLQ posed an actual, credible threat of violence. Can you imagine Tame Iti and co. trying to rob a bank or kidnap a government minister? It would be like the Dad's Army of urban terrorism.
They weren't found guilty because, in the end NZ society sees no value in persecuting Walter Mitty figures.
The SIS from a distance does appear well populated by ‘Jonny English’ types and the well worn ‘pie and Penthouse’ bungler legacy. I mean how about the Waihopai dome incident. Three god botherers with scythes bring Echelon down?
The blue bellies are not so circumspect and hold a grudge as John Minto, Jimmy O’Dea and others have found out recently at the GI state house removals. Did anyone with any sense of history at NZ Police really think they could form up on “Cullen’s Line” at Ruatoki and get away with it?
All that aside I still maintain the only thing the U Four could really be convicted of is behaving like prize dicks. The argument that the inefficiency of those charged with protecting this country could have serious consequences in future would cut more ice if the mulitplicity of spook squads went into the South Island and cleaned out a few of the camo clad white supremacists who also charge about with weapons in the bush.
A pity you didn't see fit to lay a substantial part of the blame for this fiasco at the feet of Helen Clark's administration which drafted and had passed inept and inoperable anti-terrorist legislation, on which the police and other authorities naively relied.
It was the Keystone Cops chasing the Boys Brigade division of Dad's Army. Entirely a propos of the current kiwi reputation under a Benny Hill government.
ak
I think the police et al use some "situations" as timely opportunities for a practice run. Police & army used the Napier gunman siege as a real-life chance to check out their operational strategies, give the boys a run in their LAVs, lock-down a town, etc.
Whatever was going on in the Ureweras, it was enough to be used as practice for our Terrorist Response capacity. Otherwise, it was just a stunningly stupid response.
"This posting is exclusive to the Bowalley Road blogsite." Godelpus
I thought it was a long quote from that idiot at Whaleoil.
"Elsewhere a jury would have convicted the perps to the full!"
Because their governments have wider powers than I'd want ours to have
"At the heart of this failure lies a paucity of intelligence."
Maybe they shouldn't have frozen out the Iwi Liason people, they're there for a purpose.
"It was the Keystone Cops chasing the Boys Brigade division of Dad's Army"
Yes except they scared the crap out of a lot of kids instead of making them laugh.
I think they got off cos they were a bunch of nillers!
As both the Urewera raids and the more recent Kim Dotcom arrests have illustrated, the NZ Police are champing at the bit for any opportunity, no matter how inappropriate, to dress up in helmets and balaclavas, leap out of helicopters and wave around high powered weaponry. FFS guys, if that's what you're into, go join the army, get shipped off to Afghanistan and let's see how long you last with that sort of attitude when taking on someone who will most definitely shoot back.
Whatever Mr Iti and co were up to, any chance of a rational examination of their activities was lost in the (quite justified) furore surrounding the manner of their arrest...
"our security services"
Yours, maybe, Chris.
Congratulations, Chris. A strong endorsement of your argument from that famous left-wing radical Stephen Franks on Native Affairs tonight.
L
They were emphatically not " group of armed individuals, who gave every appearance of levying war against the Crown"
They were sad sack dreamers who could not afford the paintball fee.
If they'd been real revolutionaries they would have used the court as a platform, instead of hiding behind their lawyers.
I was in Colombo Street when a group of supporters were addressing "the masses". The masses weren't taking any notice. A long haired bearded chap appealed to the passers by "we're just Kiwis like you". One laughed to oneself (titter, titter sort of thing). One suppressed an urge to call out something unkind. One continued down Colombo Street.
Chris, isn't the failure of the bourgeois state in this case a good thing?
A victory - ie: conviction of the Urewra 4 on terrorism charges - would have been a bad thing, surely?
I think you're right about the boy's brigade aspects, but you also seem to be playing into the hands of the right by slagging the Tuhoi.
I would think that you perhaps made a wrong call on this one Chris and should have the grace to retreat slowly, rather than blunder on through the undergrowth.
It's the blundering on through the undergrowth - armed to the teeth - for which I, and I suspect a substantial majority of New Zealanders, are still seeking a believable explanation.
And if it's a choice between "the bourgeois state" and a bunch of proto-terrorists, well, Martin, I'm quite happy to take the bourgeois state.
Post a Comment