Family of Suicide Deaths - coping with difficulties, making sense, acceptance and moving on

Two suicide reports have caught my attention in the last few days.

The unfortunate, unexpected and sudden demise of inseparable adorable couple Marc and Cher Thomson has shocked Sydney - from their families, customers, other restaurant owners to all food lovers.  The restaurant is closed according to the website.

Most of us know that restaurants especially high end and fine dining are facing stiff competition, stringent regulatory boards and council scrutiny, high rental, staff shortage and costs, not to mention the long hours, hard work and high sunk in investments. Even a good turnover does not promise any profit after deducting all the expenses. Many local businesses are actually struggling despite healthy picture compared to the US and most ailing European economies.

Why should we be surprised? The trouble is we are too busy with our own lives that we do not seek or start asking until it is too late. Prevention is always better than cure. 

Unlike distress from bullying leading to deaths, there are few signals from those who are bent on ending it all.  These are likely to be highly driven and tenacious people who have tried everything and finally decided to give up. Pride and honour meant more than going through hell in life. It would not be an "attempt" as there is no turning back. 

Nevertheless, even the best kept secret will reveal some tell-tale signs. Even if you are not equipped with the knowledge and skills to deal with psychological issues, it helps to take notice and show care.  Better be safe than sorry - check if you sense that a depressed or anxious friend or relative is not their usual self and going downhill? This would be a good start to prevent an unhappy ending. 

The death of American researcher Shane Todd has gained more publicly in the ensuing court case. His parents are obviously in denial to have challenged the coroner's suicide verdict which even the FBI has concurred. The older Todds could not accept that their precious son, despite having bouts depression during his university days and showing signs of unhappiness with his work, could take his own life.

Instead, imaginations have run wild with hypotheses of Sino-Singapore conspiracy against America and murder made to look like suicide being thrown up. Death is no laughing matter but the exchanges in court are replete with themes found in spy movies. Like those who have passed on, the living are too proud and disappointed with the reality.

Compassion goes to all those who have lost their love ones under such tragic circumstances.  The living suffers as much if not more than the dead. Help may not be too far for bereaved families overcome their grief, gain support and comfort and better understanding.  

Australian travellers, please respect local laws and stay out of trouble - the limitations of diplomatic assistance

The wisdom of ancient proverbs : "when in Rome, do as the Romans do" still rings true and applies to modern day situations.

Prof Natalie Klein's article is a timely reminder of the harsh realities for Australians who expect miracles for their folly to think twice before committing a crime overseas.

Celebrities of the unwelcome sort such as Schapelle Corby and the "Bali Nine" gang should starkly deter Aussies from getting into the wrong side of law but to no avail. Instead the media and public are frequently jump in to criticise others and defend the flagrant violation of laws.

Instead of getting mad at the Indonesian system and Australian government, it would be more prudent to avoid getting into trouble by observing local laws. Different jurisdictions have varying penalties to deal with drug trafficking and for good reasons to suit local conditions. It is not for foreigners to argue and try to make exceptions because we are unique and superior and others owe us a living or explanation.

Face is important to everyone, including Aussies, Americans, Europeans, Africans, etc. Some Asian societies are particularly more sensitive and place great importance to "face" saving. The media stoking public anger and whipping up a frenzy is not going to help. Instead, it will jeopardise chances of diplomatic efforts to save whoever is in trouble.

If we hope others will respect Australian laws, we should also do the same and give due recognition when we are on foreign soil. International relations work smoothly on the basis of reciprocity. It is a simple fact of life and should be understood by all.

Quote :

The Australian government has a choice as to what help it will provide nationals imprisoned overseas. Such assistance would usually be welcomed. Yet, as the pressure to act increases, international tension may rise and prevent a quick and favourable resolution.

Australians travelling overseas are often in need of help from their government. They lose their passports, need medical help, get caught up in civil unrest or natural disasters, and they are arrested.

What the government can and should do to help is highly contentious. Under international law, detained individuals can demand little more than the right to have their consulate informed of their situation. What steps a government then takes is a matter of discretion.

The varied support Australia has offered to its nationals detained abroad can be readily seen by the cases of David Hicks and Stern Hu.

The government did obtain a range of assurances from the United States as to Mr Hicks's treatment when he was first detained, but, as is well known, it took its time before insisting that steps be taken to secure Mr Hicks's return. For Mr Hu, the former Rio Tinto executive arrested for bribery and stealing commercial secrets in China, Australia sought to ensure a prompt trial but seemingly did not insist on its rights under a bilateral consular treaty to attend that trial.

The help the Bali boy is receiving is exceptional service, and may not ultimately be in his interest. No Australian should forget that when we travel overseas, we are bound by the laws of the country we're in, including any punishment for violating those laws, whether it is the death penalty or a month in rehab.

Australia cannot step in and have those laws changed or demand that they not apply to an Australian citizen. Imagine if Indonesia contacted the Australian government demanding the immediate return of men and boys held on people smuggling charges. It is unlikely Australia would brook such interference.

Each country is entitled to apply its judicial processes to alleged offenders within its jurisdiction. If due process rights or other human rights of an individual are violated, national courts are afforded the opportunity to address those violations.

Australia's Foreign Minister has acknowledged that Indonesian legal process must be followed for the Bali boy. Kevin Rudd has rightly recognised that any help Australia offers falls within the parameters of Indonesian law.

Australia's right to take legal action on behalf of one of its nationals and assert that claim against another country crystallises when the remedies available domestically have been exhausted. This is Australia's right of diplomatic protection under international law. Before then, it is a question of diplomacy and consular assistance.

The arrest and detention of Australians overseas has become sufficiently common that the government has produced an information pack on its Smartraveller website on what services it may offer. They do not include phone calls from the Prime Minister while the ambassador visits your jail cell. Nor do they normally include front-page news stories with statements of support by the Foreign Minister.

Australia has been able to work effectively behind the scenes to help nationals imprisoned abroad. Thursday's Senate estimates committee hearing that exposed how the name of the Bali boy had been revealed by both sides of Parliament cuts against any notion of diplomatic discretion in Australia's dealing with Indonesia over the Bali Boy.

The difficulty now for the boy is that the high level assistance and large media coverage might backfire.

Indonesia has been left in a more difficult position because of the amount of attention this case has generated. The Indonesian government wants to send a message about its fight against drug offenders. If it makes a decision favourable to the boy now, it risks looking like it has succumbed to Australian pressure in the application of its drug laws. It is then doubtful that any lesson is learned from this episode by other Australians holidaying in Bali. These factors are now more acute and don't help the Bali boy.

This conundrum could have been avoided. Quiet diplomacy and less media attention may have done more for the plight of the boy than may presently be the case.

Feasibility of cherry picking selected sharia laws for economic gains?

Australia is a secular country and the law of the state is fair, just and unprejudiced, and presumably all-encompassing and capable of taking care of interests of citizens and foreigners regardless of religions, cultures and political affiliations.

Common law originated in England and comprises statutes (legislation) and precedence of judge-made laws. Other than the moral basis of Christianity and Anglo-Saxon cultural tenets, the courts are given much flexibility interpret and adapt laws to new circumstances. It is progressive unlike certain static laws that are non-negotiable.

It is difficult to conceive how minorities in the country and the world could justify imposing their religious laws unless there is siginificant historical and social meaning, such as Aboriginal land rights.

The bizzare incident of a single crazy Muslim taking Sharia law into his own hands and defying the rules of the land has not found supporters even among majority of the educated moderate Muslim Australians nor the Islamic authorities.

While the originators of Sharia law expect the legal system to be taken in totality, it has been limited to family law in countries that have adopted some aspects of it. Since the ancient expectation of holistic application of Sharia is not feasible or realistic in the modern world, it is difficult to fathom how much Sharia could undermine the existing legal framework with the ground rule that where contradictions exist, the state laws prevail.

Moreover, the strong resistance from other conservative religious quarters who see any concession as capitulation would likely limit the influence of Sharia in years to come.

However, investor dollars are luring academics and governments to make compromises and exceptions. How the authorities could balance economic interests with fair protection and cultural chauvinism tendencies would be quite a challenge.

Laws are evolving. Civil law systems are learning from common law. The World Trade Organisation adopts a rule-based formula similar to civil law.

Intelligent and wise legislature and judicary probably matter more than mere prescriptions.

QUOTES

It's doubtful that sharia specifies the use of electrical cables in this sort of retribution, but that might not be the worst of it. Suggestions have emerged "from one local Auburn source" that the victim may have owed money to a number of people. If so, this could be a normal bit of roughing-up to speed the return of outstanding funds – not unknown in Australia or other common law countries as a method of settling debts.

---

Clearly, the government is keen for Australia to dip into $1.6 trillion worth of Islamic investment.

As academics Ann Black and Kerrie Sadiq write in the University of NSW Law Journal, finance is part of "good sharia law", which has an emphasis on profit sharing instead of charging interest and excluding investment in things contrary to Islamic principles.

If we can made a quid out of adapting our principles to include Islamic methods of finance and investment, then sharia has a welcome place in our system.

On the other hand (a phrase with a special meaning in parts of the Muslim world) Black and Sadiq point to Islamic family law, such as the recognition of polygamy and Muslim divorce, which is regarded as "bad sharia law".

---

The hudud punishments of hand severing, stoning to death and beating with cables are confined to a few countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Iran. As far as we know there is no credible proposal that they be allowed to function in parallel with the Australian legal system, although you wonder when you see Australians screeching at accused persons as they are driven away in police vehicles.

---

The vast majority of Muslim countries and Muslims have moved on from the middle ages. It was interesting to see a number of Islamic organisations condemn the alcohol-tippling/debt-recovery punishment. Sheikh Taj el-Din al Hilaly, of the Lakemba Mosque, said the attackers should be "assessed for a mental disorder" and those found guilty deported. Guilty of a mental disorder takes our law into uncharted waters, so maybe it's best to say no more about it.

In Britain there are close to 100 sharia tribunals that deal with matters such as domestic relations and inheritance, with appeals to the civil courts.
In Australia, law reform commissions have recommended that aspects of Aboriginal customary law be permitted to function alongside white man's law. The Law Council of Australia welcomes that and, indeed, it has been recognised in the Northern Territory.

Our system of laws is not immune from the the imprecations of Christian fundamentalism, either. For instance, the Reverend Fred Nile is forever trying to impose some sort of Christian sharia on his flock, the people of NSW. Maybe he should be allowed to have his own courts to impose special punishments on prostitutes, gays, and students who skive off from scripture classes.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/why-good-sharia-is-championed-in-some-surprising-quarters-20110721-1hqy0.html#ixzz1SywuRirw

NSW Burqua Laws : covers security, religious sensitivity yet politically correct

Though NSW is credited for introducing clearer burqua laws, the legislation is long overdue. A controversial and sensitive topic, a prudent measure has finally cleared the air and tensions that constrained law enforcers and reassured the public.

NSW government's decision to force people, including Muslim women, to remove head coverings and helmet when asked by police is welcomed by many quarters, with the exception of some individual liberty and human rightis groups.

Quote : It follows the case of a Sydney woman who was acquitted of making a false accusation against a police officer because the judge ruled there was no way to confirm it was actually the woman due to the veil covering her face.


Unlike the intolerance and blanket rules agitated by conservative European politicians to ban religious cover, the NSW government has shown an objective and generic application of the laws that balances both ends of the spectrum. Politicians who play on emotions and whip up a frenzy are unlikely to go far and treading on a tight rope. NSW has got it right this instance.



Quote : Premier Barry O'Farrell has emphasised the change is not aimed at any specific religion or group, though he hopes it will prevent a repeat of Ms Matthews' case.



Even the Islamic Council is agreeable that safety and security issues should prevail in certain situations when the identity of the person who committed a crime or traffic offence must be verified against the ID photo.

Quote : The chairman of the state's Islamic Council, Khaled Sukkarieh, says a Muslim woman can reveal her face to a man for identification purposes.

"Islamically, for all Australians, irrespective of ethnicity or faith, shall respect and abide by the constitutional law of Australia. If this is handled in a sensible and a sensitive manner, there should be no issues whatsoever. ," Mr Sukkarieh said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/07/05/3261038.htm

Some Arabs in progressive Jordan in fact see merits in discarding the traditional garbs that cover the face and body completely by women wearing the burqa and niqab especially when it constituted a security threat.

http://oneworldtalk.freeforums.org/abused-for-crime-the-veil-of-secrecy-t3276.html

NSW's unprecedented and no drama laws has prompted the West Australian government to act. Now that's something the First State could be proud about.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/wa-to-consider-nsw-burqa-laws/story-e6frg13u-1226088006380

Gains and governance overshadow politicised "national Interests" in a globalised economy : proposed Singapore-Australian Stock Exchange merger

Most articles on the issue of the proposed Singapore-Australian stock exchanges merger have been replete with emotional outbursts on national interest and the impact on investors' profits.

Here are some objective analysis by economic, industry, legal and regulatory experts that should be considered seriously than politicising an economic issues.

The main players are keen but each side is worried that they have the short end of the deal. Most Australians' concerns focus on compromises on regulations of companies' listing, complaince such as disclosure requirements and independence. Singaporean analysts, on the other hand, are uncomfortable that the venture is overpriced and laden with obstacles on approval as well as potential management and competition issues from Chi-X.

It is a perennial challenge to achieve an optimal balance between regulation and economic vibrance.

QUOTE :

[Lawyers Michael Wilton and Jill Gauntlett say : ... shareholders should be comforted by the long historical links in regulation between Australia and Singapore. When Singapore fashioned its corporations law almost 50 years ago, it modelled it on the uniform Companies Act passed by all Australian states in 1961. Revised uniform listing rules took effect in Australia at the same time.]

[Singapore has different financial track record requirements and does not have an equivalent of Australia's assets test that allows mining exploration companies to list before they turn a profit.]

[Jennifer Hill, Professor of Law in University of Sydney says :
Australia and Singapore allow their exchanges to grant waivers case by case. This ''may potentially constitute a form of selective regulation'' ... the corporate governance consultancy ISS released a report in 2007 that concluded that the Australian waiver scheme lacked transparency, especially compared with New Zealand, but was substantially more transparent than London or New York .... such disparities could be a concern as global competition among exchanges increases.]

[''During the 1990s, it was often assumed that the trend towards cross-listing of foreign firms in the United States was itself a new form of regulatory competition, under which foreign companies from jurisdictions with poor corporate governance would cross-list to gain regulatory credibility,'' she says.

But this assumption was questioned after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in 2002, when many high-profile Asian companies bypassed the New York Stock Exchange in favour of other international exchanges.

''This suggested that overly stringent governance may repel, rather than attract, cross-listing,'' Hill says. ''This remains a danger for securities exchanges, particularly given increased competition for listing and trading revenues.'' ]

http://www.theage.com.au/business/asx-merger-plan-raises-questions-of-governance-20101028-175s7.html

Big Businesses Almost Always Win Legal Cases?

There are good and bad laws and the same can be seen in judgements. Complaints fall to deaf ears after the heat dissipates but the harsh realities remain lessons for us.

Given the flexible nature of equitable law, it is expectedly devoid of universally reliable guidelines especially on actions that attract estoppel.

This happened almost a decade ago. Franchisees of Mobil pleaded claims based on breach of contract, estoppel and contravention of provisions of the Trade Practices Act but all fell through.

Mobil was alleged to have unilaterally revoked its offer (that attainment of good performance would ensure the renewal of tenure) after representees followed up with acts of acceptance (a detrimental reliance).

The courts held that statements made by Mobil agents at a conference were vague, and did not amount to encouragement, nor were there elements of a legal relationship that could have given rise to reliable assumptions by the franchisees. Some said this was crap because precedence of finding estoppel as a sword did not require the existence of a formal contract.

Mobil’s success in all three major cases raised concerns among franchisees across industries and brand names. Great! Estoppel could not be counted upon to grant equitable relief!

Mobil franchiees whose tenure were discontinued by Mobil despite improvements made to the shop front and standard of service did not receive any compensation.

Of course there are many other prominent corporate names and banks that frequently triumph in litigation cases, albeit on small technicality. News reports do not provide indepth understanding of the pain small fries go through financially and emotionally when trampled upon in the highly competitive and inequitable business world.

- Copyright Reserved.
Permission required for reprint of any part of this article.

Coverup package meal deal - a violation of Trade Practices Act?

Australia has some of the strictest consumer protection legislation in the world, too strict, some businesses have complained. Yet, there are some traders who are able to get up and get away. For small amounts and unclear areas, customers are generally quite forgiving, gracious and generous. They either do not bother to take up the issue, lack the heart and time to complain or kick up a fuss at the scene.


I would like to share one incident which is not a clear cut case of contravention but nevertheless caused unease.

A lunch special meal on the board stand placed outside a reputable restaurant includes two course meal with any free drink (wine, beer or soft drink). This was the first time we patronised this particular outlet (they have a main branch in the city which we have been).

When it came to ordering, we were preoccupied with ordering the two dishes for the two course meal. The wait staff / manager asked if we wanted to order a drink. Not remembering that a drink was inclusive of the meal special, we requested for water for all since there were minor in the group. Only a few seconds later when those sitting at the window took another glance at the board outside that we were reminded of the package deal. Though not all of us wanted drinks other than water, it would only be proper that customers should be reminded that they are entitled to more expensive drinks (from the restaurants' perspective).

When the wait staff returned (before we were served any drinks) and enquiries were made to clarify the offer, she quickly said "that's why I asked if you wanted to order drinks." Was that a

coverup statement sufficient to absolve themselves?

It would have helped if they merely mentioned that the drinks were inclusive of the lunch special meal. There would not have been any need for guessing, misgivings and suspicion of dishonest practice.

The Trade Practices Act focuses on fulfiling promises of bait advertisements. We have to interpret how the context fits in with the statute.
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item.phtml?itemId=304501&nodeId=04bc9aa47950c6358a6e573a1537af3d&fn=Advertising%20&%20selling_A4%20flyer_Jan07.pdf

Normally business managers and staff would size up and gauge the attitude of the customer to attempt a gloss over. But looks can be deceptive and they may be taking a chance if someone is bent on seeking justice from the small claims tribunal even when small amounts are involved.

Corporeal - real or imagined human and things

Definition of Corporeal according to the online dictionary :

1. of the nature of the physical body; bodily.
2. material; tangible: corporeal property.

In the legal context, we often distinguish between corporeal (flesh and blood) and the artificial entity of the company. The company has the benefit of protection undert the corporate veil. But ultimately, its directors (real people) are responsible if they mismange or engage in fraudulent activities. The rich and unconscionable bankers and industrialists may have to face the realities if the law catches up with them, some day.


In the cyber world, we encounter virtual peoples behind masks, if any skeletons in the closets, they will be discovered over a long time or never. The safety behind the monitor may guard against physical attacks but it does not stop cyber bullies from inflicting pain or declared altruistic philosophers who wish to change the world but injure others in the process. Take care.