THE PRESS FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 1986. Ransom not an issue

Press, 24 January 1986, Page 16

THE PRESS FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 1986. Ransom not an issue

The Prime Minister, Mr Lange, has hinted strongly that France might refuse to pay compensation for the Rainbow Warrior bombing until the pair of French agents now serving prison terms in New Zealand on charges arising from the bombing are safely back on French soil. The two issues — the deportation of Captain Dominique Prieur and Major Alain Mafart, and the question of reparations — are separate matters, even if the French Government does not want them to be treated separately. There seems to be a notion in Paris that, because New Zealand has asked for $2O million in compensation from France, Prieur and Mafart can be ransomed.

Mr Lange has said repeatedly — and properly — that people caught committing criminal acts in this country cannot be bought out of prison. It seems that he must say it again and even more loudly. The question of ransom simply does not, and should not, arise. The pair had a hand in a most serious crime and the point has to be made that terrorists who commit crimes in New Zealand, whatever their official standing, will be punished severely. This has been achieved through the proper judicial process. The pair pleaded guilty and were sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years. To over-ride the judicial process by a political one would be grossly improper and hold grave consequences for the impartial administration of law in this country.

If the two agents were deported, they would .be beyond the jurisdiction of New Zealand. Considering the mood that is apparent in France, and considering that France has not prosecuted the accomplices of Prieur and Mafart, it is most unlikely that France would hold the pair in custody to serve out their sentences if they were sent back. To deport the pair would almost certainly be to set them free.

The determination with which France is pursuing its requests to have the pair repatriated adds weight to this likelihood. Such an outcome would be politically disastrous for Mr Lange and his Government, as well he knows, and any hint of a deal like this almost certainly would leak out in due course.

Mr Lange acknowledges that there is little New Zealand can do should France refuse to resume negotiations on compensation. There is no forum which could compel the attendance of both parties and no legal obligation on France to talk to New Zealand at all. A case to the World Court could have little practical effect except, perhaps, to give New Zealand the satisfaction of having proved a point and provoking the French from their present state of embarrassment to one of anger. If France insists on making the choice for New Zealand one of deporting Prieur and Mafart or forgoing compensation, the choice is beyond debate: the lack of reparation will be just too bad.