Thursday, 10 March 2011 4:29 PM

Explanation Needed On the Provision Of Solomon Islands Amnesty Law

Dear Editor,

In the years since leaving office in the Solomon Islands, I have constantly advocated the pursuit of reconciliation, but true reconciliation, in my view, will only come when those responsible for starting what amounted to a virtual civil war, instigating ethnic violence and causing so much bloodshed, face the consequences of their actions and are brought to justice. Society must be able to come to terms with its past on a morally acceptable basis in order to advance and sustain reconciliation.

If the likes of Keke, Sangu, Su'u and more recently Lusibaea and Te'e, the, the "foot soldiers," are prosecuted for their involvement in criminal activities during the ethnic tension period, despite the provision of Section 91 (4) of the Constitution which provides for amnesty or immunity from prosecution for criminal acts done before 15 October 2000, is it likely that one can expect the real "big fish" to be netted soon and charged with inciting the ethnic conflict, for which ample evidence exists?

I respectfully request the Director of Public Prosecutions to explain to the Solomon Islands public and to those of us who, while outside the country and remain committed to seeing justice done, why the amnesty provisions I have quoted can seemingly be avoided to prosecute a few but not the real perpetrators of the treachery that brought the Solomon Islands to a virtual collapse, politically and economically?

Yours sincerely

Frank Short

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this letter/article are those of Frank Short and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Solomon Times Online.

Other Letters to the Editor All Letters
By GEOFFREY MAURIASI USP, Lacuala Campus, Fiji
By CHARLES KOULI Gizo, Western Province
By JAQUE FRIEDMAN New Zealand