Am I in a frenzied minority when I express disquiet about the Coronial enquiry being undertaken over the recent few months following the two Mosque attacks?
I don’t think there was a person I know who didn’t grieve for those poor souls cut down by an extremist’s gun. How we poured out our awhi to their whanau and their faith journey. We stood alongside them as they cried, and we cried with them. As a city we expressed our grieve through the massive floral tribute outside the Botanic gardens and the silent human circle protecting the call for prayers in Hagley park.
We were proud of our police and our ambulance personnel. They were brave and they acted as best they could. The two out of town cops who caught that murderer acted in an exceptional manner. Our hearts went out to the individuals who selflessly assisted the injured and the dying. The ambulance staff wondering if the gunman was still present, courageously entered a terrifying place and tended to those who desperately needed attention. Other members of the public assisted with the rescue, transporting people to the hospital.
It was a nightmare setting and our support services went beyond the call of duty to do the right thing.
Now, we have a Coronial enquiry which questioning the confidence and the professionalism of those who did their best on the day, and those that followed.
Below is an opinion piece in the Press recently Mike Ardagh, a Professor of Emergency Medicine at Otago University. Mike was in the Intensive Care Unit at CDHB (remember that great organisation…) on the day of the massacre. I have not cut out any part of this writing as every word makes a point. Mike wrote:
A coronial inquest into the terrible terrorist attacks at the Al Noor Mosque and the Linwood Islamic Centre in Christchurch, is an important way to determine the facts, to learn, and to better plan to prevent and manage potential future events. These, of course, are worthy and important objectives.
Inquest and inquisition are words that appear to mean largely similar things although, at least in my mind, the former implies a collaborative exploration and the latter a confrontational interrogation.
Which best describes this coronial inquest? While many folk are taking the stand and being interrogated, the only criminal associated with this event isn’t one of them.
Instead, those on the stand seem to be good people, who did a great job under difficult circumstances. Indeed, their actions were often heroic. In addition, their experiences are already causing many of them significant mental distress.
Is it right, or even useful, to put them in front of the world and suggest they were too slow, too confused, otherwise deficient, or even biased, in their decision making?
I concede that I, like most people observing the inquest, am doing so through a media filter, which might not be a balanced representation. However, what I am seeing emphasises two fundamental problems with this process.
First, a retrospective consideration undertaken in the cold light of day, is very different to decision making in a prospective and rapidly evolving context, confounded by considerable uncertainty.
Understanding the contrast between deliberations based on appreciating the prospective and evolving context, and those based on the retrospective certainty of what happened and how, is vitally important so that undue criticism is avoided.
Second, the adversarial and confrontational nature of the inquest does not appear to be well suited to examining events of this sort.
First, it is based on winning an argument, rather than finding the facts. Second, it is unfair and, frankly, mean.
The good people subjected to this approach are not criminals nor accused of criminal acts, and many are already significantly distressed by the events they experienced. A more collaborative exploration might not only be more user-friendly but would probably gather more useful information.
I was in the Emergency Department at Christchurch Hospital that day and I remember it well. Most of all I remember good people doing excellent things under very, very unusual circumstances.
However, I wasn’t out there amid the danger and the uncertainty. I wasn’t trying to make sense of the unfathomable, control the overwhelming, nor build a plan on a foundation of uncertainty, rumour, and conjecture. What a hell of a job faced many people, including our front-line emergency services.
And, under the circumstances, they did a hell of a job. Let’s not forget that.
I have heard that many of the people who represent the best of our support services are leaving the enquiry devastated. Taken apart by the confrontational style of the coronial proceedings..
I remember the wise words from Farid Ahmed after his wife, Husna, was shot dead by the gunman. Farid said, as he addressed a crowd of around 23,000 people at the National Remembrance Service in Hagley Park.
“I don’t want to have a heart that is boiling like a volcano,” he said.
“That’s why I have chosen peace. I have chosen love and I have forgiven.”
Frank Film reported in a documentary that:
Ahmed’s message of forgiveness spread across the globe. He has meet with world leaders, been honoured with an international peace award while speaking at the Forum for Promoting Peace in Muslim Societies, and continues to call for peace on the global stage.
“I had never imagined that one word is so powerful – forgiveness. Forgiveness is the result of just common sense. If we just question ourselves, what is going to benefit me in the future? Anger or forgiveness?”
It seems that the Court process has ignored the wise words of this compassionate leader in our society. At the time of the gathering of grief, where we were seen as an example to the world, we listened to this man, and forgave. Often despite our personal misgivings about this.
Now, we appear to be tearing apart good, decent, people with inquisitorial style, asking what seems to be stupid questions like “could you have been 5 minutes earlier” and the like. How would we feel if we had to decide whether to enter a place where a mass murderer could still be present? What if there were several killers? They didn’t know.
I have found the whole exercise distasteful and would like to wish all those grieving survivors and responders, who have been torn apart by the coronial process all the best. Don’t give up because you have been treated badly in a court room.
To all our city’s first responders we respect and need your services and your amazing commitment to assisting us in our hour of need. I salute you and thank you for being who you are and who you were on that dreadful day when we needed you so badly.
It’s surely not a time for utu, so I conclude with a quote from Farid again:
……..what is going to benefit me in the future? Anger or forgiveness?”
Digby Prosser says
Entirely agree Gary with your statements on this
Paul McGahan says
Absolutely agree with you on this one Gary. I am sure lessons can be learned in a process like this without it having to be inquisitorial. This is a time where the judiciary, in this case a Royal Commission of Inquiry, needs to be able to adjust it’s settings in this type of instance to take account of the families of those who lost loved ones, and to all of those who did their best on the day in dire and difficult circumstances. Yes, establish the facts for future emergency preparedness but don’t subject people who tried their best to what in essence feels like a show trial on TV news channels. Drawing on aspects of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions might provide some clues as to how such a difficult matter could be conducted in the future. And riding roughshod over the magnanimous gesture of forgiveness led out by Farid Ahmed that was so powerful in the healing for Christchurch – well, hopefully they may pick up on your well put commentary on this Gary.
Di Trower says
Thank you, Garry, and Mike Ardagh too. I agree with every word. Also, Paul McGahan has summed up the process that is needed in an inquiry such as this in the future. Let’s hope there is never a need for another one and that the lessons learned can assist with strategies if they are ever needed again (heaven forbid!).
I’d like to think, after it is all over, that the coroner will reinforce the bravery of all responders & victims concerned. These were such extraordinary circumstances and I do wonder what those doing the interrogation (or any of us) might have done under similar circumstances. I don’t think many of us would have been so courageous.
CamobellRoberts says
I agree, Garry. So many people on the day did their very best in a circumstance they could never have been prepared for,
Chris Kissling says
Those asking the questions were not involved during the terrorist attack. They are representing survivors who seek answers that might have saved the lives lost. Their legal training is rarely geared to a soft approach. Confrontation in search of truth is their style which is inappropriate in this case. We were not a community experienced in response to terrorist attacks. Hindsight can be helpful when looking to improve communications systems, but it is not helpful to make first responders feel they messed up when they did their best without benefit of the big picture that will come from this Coronial enquiry that should not be an inquisition. None of those assisting the inquiry are on trial. Their honest recount of the drama will be helpful but they should not be retraumatised in the process of finding the systemic inadequacies in the availability of timely information that would have assisted their response decisions. They lived and survived the moment. Those questioning them were not there. If they had been the tone of their questions might be very different. Please do not look for scapegoats.
Ross Milne says
I too, am not impressed with the process. As someone who trained for and experienced combat, I know that success is very difficult to define in this scenario. The military saying is that no plan survives past the start line. Individuals were confronted with situations that they may have trained for in a classroom situation but as soon as bullets are coming at you, that training is quickly forgotten. Only soldiers are trained to run towards the bullets and we should not expect the courageous individuals who responded on that day to have the same level of intent. I was horrified to hear that a few minutes delay could be a reason to hold someone to account in a situation that was life threatening and most of all unknown. That is an unacceptable notion.
Michael Greer says
I’m enormously relieved to discover it’s not only me who is feeling appalled by the shamelessly insensitive, adversarial conduct that is too often emerging in the proceedings of this coronial inquiry. It is an unnecessary abrasive inquisitorial style that has a thoroughly unwelcome edge of ugliness.
Eileen says
I feel it’s not about blame but learning for future events.
I was horrified to hear those poor traumatized survivors at Linwood were made to put their hands on head before being allowed to leave the mosque.
Also for those who wanted to offer support to the wounded were prevented. My heart goes out to the lady who was prevented from being with her dying husband.
Kathryn Dalziel says
Kia ora koutou
Te Whāriki kia mohio ai tātou ki a tātou
E kore e taea e te whenu kotahi
Kia mōhio ai tātou ki a tātou.
Mā te mahi tahi o ngā whenu,
Mā te tahi o ngā kairaranga,
Ka oti tēnei whāriki.
I te otinga
me titiro tātou ki ngā mea pai
ka puta mai,
ā tana wā, me titiro hoki
ki ngā raranga i makere
nā te mea he kōrero ano kei reira
The tapestry of understanding
cannot be woven
by one strand alone.
Only by the working together of strands
and the working together of weavers
will such a tapestry be completed.
When it is complete,
let us look at the good that comes from it,
and in time we should also look
at those dropped stiches
because they also have a message
The key point is this: “I concede that I, like most people observing the inquest, am doing so through a media filter, which might not be a balanced representation.” That is correct. Sound bites in the media do not encapsulate the 7 weeks of hearing time and the disclosure work leading up to the inquest hearing.
This Inquest hearing (which is an inquisitorial process) has been an important process for all interested parties and we have learned so much which will be reflected in the Coroner’s Report.
tuesdayclub says
thanks Kathryn 🙂