Senator BOURNE —My question is directed to the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Does the government accept that the recent disrupted conference on East Timor held in Malaysia a week ago was a legal gathering? On what advice did the Prime Minister say that the violent disruption of the conference and subsequent arrest of 10 Australians was unfortunate and that they should have had respect for Malaysian law before they decided to attend the conference? Was consular assistance immediately available to all the Australians arrested? Finally, does the government still subscribe to the universal human charter on human rights and, in particular, to article 20, which states that everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly?

Senator HILL —The issue of legality, of course, was a subject before the Malaysian court after the event. If Senator Bourne is saying that the Australian government should have in some way anticipated that the Malaysian court would find that the meeting was legal in advance, then she is perhaps asking just a trifle too much. In fact, we are having some difficulty—Senator Bourne might have better sources, of course—in getting the details of that Malaysian court's determination. As I understand, it was heard by a single judge in chambers and there was no court report available. But we did read the reports in the press as to the outcome.

Senator Faulkner —Are you denying it?

Senator HILL —I am not quarrelling with that, but Senator Bourne is raising the issue of legality under Malaysian law. I am saying that it is quite difficult to determine the basis upon which the Malaysian court made its determination. But, in any event, that was after the event.

In relation to the event itself, the government said, as you have conceded, Senator Bourne, that what occurred was clearly regrettable. Those words speak for themselves, really. I would have thought that we would all regard what occurred as regrettable. Nevertheless, as the Australian government noted, the Malaysian government had in turn made a clear decision on 4 November that the conference could not go ahead. I understand that this decision was clearly conveyed to the conference organisers and through a press conference on 4 November. That was widely reported in the Malaysian and regional media the next day.

I am advised that the Deputy Home Affairs Minister spoke to some conference organisers and advised them of the Malaysian cabinet decision. The Malaysian government's intention was further clearly demonstrated by the arrest and subsequent deportation by immigration officials of a Filipino conference organiser, Renato Constantino, on his arrival in Kuala Lumpur on 6 November. So the signals were clear in relation to the Malaysian government's attitude to this particular conference.

What the government said is that it is not for the Australian government to tell the Malaysian government how to conduct its internal policies. Interestingly, that view was shared by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Beazley, who, according to the Sydney Morning Herald of 12 November, said:

I think it is entirely reasonable that a nation will determine . . . precisely what might be said by other people on its soil.

In relation to the issue of consular responsibilities, I am told that Mr Downer, his staff and his department worked through the weekend of 9 and 10 November to ensure that the welfare of Australian citizens was not compromised. The minister spoke with the Australian High Commission in Kuala Lumpur three times on 10 November to assure himself that Australian citizens were accorded the best possible treatment.

In relation to the ABC journalist, Catherine McGrath, it is pleasing that the ABC wrote to the minister thanking him and the department for the energy with which they assisted Ms McGrath. In relation to the international covenant, obviously we continue to support it.

Senator BOURNE —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for that answer. The minister did say in his answer, however, that he believed the signals were clear. Obviously, they were not clear to participants such as Bishop Deakin, who had no absolutely idea that the Malaysian cabinet had made the decision that the conference would be illegal. I did not believe a cabinet could make a decision on legality and illegality; I thought that was a matter for legislation. Would the minister please go back to the Prime Minister's office or the foreign minister's office and get all the details of whether or not the Australian participants in that conference—and they obviously were going to be participants in that conference—were told that Australia believed this was going to be an illegal conference? Could the minister provide us with the details of that?

Senator HILL —I am happy to refer that back to the Prime Minister and/or the foreign minister.