Human Rights Abuse in Queensland

Some Australian politicians and media are criticising violations of human rights in China, Cuba and elsewhere while ignoring such violations in our own country. Does not this look cynical and hypocritical?

I am concerned about civil rights in Queensland, where quite a number of people continue to call Queensland a 'police state'. In 1980s, there was a Royal Commission of Inquiry into alleged police crimes and misconduct, and police commissioner and some senior police officers were jailed for corruption. In 2009, former chairman of that Commission Justice Fitzgerald publicly warned that Queensland has been again heading towards systemic corruption. Also, one very respected retired Judge (who cannot be named ) alluded that Queensland government is lacking political will to address this issue. In 2010, the chairman of Queensland Crime and Misconduct Commission Martin Moynihan, retired judge of the Supreme Court of Queensland, publicly accused Queensland Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson of "presiding over a culture of cover-up". Nevertheless, Queensland Government extended this Police Commissioner's contract for two more years. There have been few rather cosmetic prosecutions of junior police officers, accompanied by comments that there is no systemic corruption and "few bad apples" does not rot a healthy body of Queensland Police. Obviously, this cannot be true, as if it has not been a systemic corruption and "culture of cover-up" within Queensland Police Service, the majority of corruption cases would be quickly noticed and fixed by police itself due to the specificity of its work. Alas, usually, police does attempt not to admit or play down such cases.

Yet, there is a number of cases of Queensland Police acting above the law and not being responsible for its alleged crimes and misconduct. The most known case is Palm island death in police custody from unnatural causes, consequent local residents’ riot and burnt down police station, for which no-one of police officials was held criminally and even administratively responsible.

Although to a lesser extent, Vincent Berg’s case also demonstrates continuing severe violation of democratic principles and human rights in Queensland, as local authorities refuse to investigate alleged police crimes and misconduct associated with Vincent Berg’s criminal case stating that it cannot be done before the conclusion of Vincent Berg’s case in the courts. Yet, letters received from the courts reveal that there exists no legal obstacle for an immediate commencement of required criminal investigation.

Now, let us imagine that an Australian aboriginal man ‘accidently’ fell on a policeman, and the latter died shortly because his liver was torn into halves and, despite his cries, he was left to die without any medical help. Would such a case receive similar treatment in Queensland or anywhere in the world, which was given to the Palm Island case, and similar outcome as well?

Let us fantasize that Vincent Berg tortured police officers by sleep deprivation after which they were hospitalised, issued false statements and affidavits to the courts, fabricated evidence, and so forth in regard to police officers. Would in such a case Queensland authorities be as unwilling to initiate a criminal investigation as they are in vice versa case?

Alas, neither deceased aboriginal man nor Vincent Berg or any other 'ordinary' person in Queensland have the same human rights as the police officers. Yet, equality of all persons before the law is a fundamental principle of democracy, and any police officer must be accountable to the law in the same manner and to the same extent as any other persons.

Opinion: Queensland Police tortured disability pensioner Vincent Berg

Vincent Berg's mental illness exacerbated after alleged torture by police. Gold Coast, Australia, 10/09/2009.

In September 2005, Australian disability pensioner Vincent Berg was returning home from Europe. He travelled from Rome to Frankfurt by train and boarded there a plane to Brisbane. After very long flight extended by several hours stopping in Singapore, on Friday, the 23rd of September 2005, Vincent Berg finally reached his home on the Gold Coast.

Since his childhood, Vincent Berg has never been capable of sleeping in trains, planes and public waiting places, and returned home extremely exhausted mentally and physically. His condition was a strange combination of extreme fatigue and feverishness.

Vincent Berg was very disturbed by accusations in some criminal offences lately made against him and wanted to clarify these with police. Almost immediately after arrival, he asked his adult son to contact police and arrange an appointment during the next working day after he had recovered from travel fatigue.

Nevertheless, police officers arrived almost immediately and started putting on Vincent Berg enormous psychological pressure compelling him to come with them to Surfers Paradise police station for an interview. He refused several times advising about extreme tiredness after long travelling. Vincent Berg’s son informed police officers that his father was a disability pensioner due to chronic mental illness, had three sleepless nights and was obviously unfit for an interview. The police officers totally ignored this advice. As Vincent Berg was unfit to resist the pressure from these officers, they forced him to consent to come with them.

Vincent Berg’s son accompanied him to Surfers Paradise police station. When Detective Sergeant Steven Geoffrey Bignell (Reg. No 5267), and Detective Sergeant Sean Wade (Reg. No 4006512), who intended to interview Vincent Berg, arrived, his son advised them that his father was a disability pensioner due to chronic mental illness, had three sleepless nights and was obviously unfit for an interview. He pointed to Vincent Berg’s noticeably abnormal psychological state and extreme exhaustion. Yet, it appeared that these police officers decided to use Vincent Berg’s unfitness for interview and his defenceless state for the purposes of their interrogation.

Vincent Berg had never truly volunteered to be interviewed that time, but was not fit mentally and physically to resist police pressure. Using this, police officers manipulated him, preferring to disregard his numerous warnings about his extreme tiredness (which can be clearly heard on the tape recording of the interrogation) and the fact that he was mentally ill. Vincent Berg was interrogated continuously for over five hours (in violation of section 403 of Queensland Police Powers and Responsibility Act 2000 limiting police interview by four hours) until almost 2am the next morning without presence of a support person as it is required in case of a person with disability by section 422(2)(b) of Queensland Police Powers and Responsibility Act 2000.

As a result of such a police ‘interview’, Vincent Berg was hospitalised shortly after interrogation, and his chronic mental illness further exacerbated. In a letter of the 10.01.2006 addressed to Vincent Berg’s son, Peter Bottomley, Director Ethical Standards Branch, Queensland Department of Corrective Services, testified that: “Mr Berg was assessed on the basis of him being identified as, or suffering from: a high risk of self harm or suicide; acute psychological needs; a heart murmur; Myopia; and physical disability… being appropriately placed into the medical centre of the AGCC [Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre] for the reasons outlined above”. Later, after being released on bail, Vincent Berg had three lengthy hospitalisations in psychiatric unit in 2005, 2006, and 2007. Currently, he requires a live-in carer for his everyday needs, and is being regularly assessed and treated by a specialist-psychiatrist for a number of mental conditions including chronic paranoid schizophrenia.

In Vincent Berg’s case, police officers Steven Geoffrey Bignell and Sean Wade violated not onlyQueensland Police Powers and Responsibility Act 2000, but the international, Australian Federal and Queensland criminal laws.

Article 1 of the UN CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1975) establishes that “torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity”.

Police officers Steven Geoffrey Bignell and Sean Wade intentionally ignored Vincent Berg’s son warning about his father’s mental illness, mental and physical exhaustion and unfitness for interview as well as Vincent Berg’s numerous warnings about tiredness, and did not seek relevant advice of a medical professional. Police officers took advantage of Vincent Berg’s mental illness and extreme physical tiredness, which they intentionally deepened by sleep deprivation, for the purposes of their interrogation. This resulted in consequent Vincent Berg’s hospitalisation and exacerbation of his chronic mental illness.

Therefore, such a police action clearly satisfies international legal definition of torture as well as AustralianCrimes (Torture) Act 1988 (Cmth) and section 320A of the Queensland Criminal Code 1899 and must lead to relevant criminal responsibility. However, local authorities are repelling Vincent Berg’s numerous requests for relevant criminal investigation.

It is common to associate torture with medieval inquisition, Hitler’s Gestapo, and totalitarian regimes of modern times or with abuse of power such as occurred in infamous Abu Ghraib. It is also accustomed to mostly associate torture with the use of physical force.

Yet, Vincent Berg’s story shows that a person (in particular, mentally ill) can be tortured without the use of physical force and that this can happen in a democratic and developed country. Such a torture is harder to detect, and, therefore, it can be more common than it seems and much more dangerous.