Brunei

Probably their own,Baggs.

Would expelling Brunei from the Commonwealth hurt people in Brunei whom Britain doesn't want to hurt?

Oh. Just read me's comment about the Commonwealth.

Thanks for the info, callistemon. Who are the Sultan's enemies that "we" protect him from?

I agree Call generally people like him with absolute power love all the associated trappings like coming to our Roysl Weddings, meeting the Queen etc etc . Money alone wouldn’t get him past the door as he is invited only because of being in the Commonwealth

Is the Sultan actually part of the government, or is he a figurehead like our queen?
He is an absolute ruler and we are keeping him in power.
Since 1962, a permanent British military presence in Brunei has helped protect the sultan from his potential enemies, based on the Royal Gurkha Rifles. The sultan pays the UK for their presence.

maryeliza I don't think there will be a corresponding increase elsewhere, most hotels will already be fully, or almost fully, staffed

Surely it’s time for there to be a level of basic human decency in order for a country to be allowed to remain in The Commonwealth.
I think that maddyone says it all in fact.

I'm sure that expelling him from the Commonwealth would hurt him personally far more than anything else.
We should remove our forces from there too.

I think Baggs the difference here is the Commonweslth membership and what that is supposed to mean. It’s leverage and taking it away as we effectively did with SA at least sends a message.

Apparently in 2006 he amended the constitution to make himself infallible under the law

Employees losing their jobs - there will be a corresponding increase elsewhere if business is really affected.

Baggs he’s an absolute monarch ie head of state and head of government. In common parlance a dictator imo

As someone said earlier, boycotting his hotels won't make any difference - except to the employees who could end up losing their jobs. He is wealthy enough not to notice or care. I also don't think a petition will have any impact whatsoever.

Condemnation should come from world leaders, although I don't hold out any hope he will change his mind.

Not trading with such countries wouldn't make a ha'porth of difference to them and as for a " mass boycott ", it's never going to happen is it ? Unrealistic.

I know they are something of a toothless tiger, but has there been any intervention by the United Nations Human Rights Council in this appalling matter?

His flagship hotel, The London Dorchester, has lost some lucrative bookings as a result, hopefully a lot more in the pipeline. As the Sultan of Brunei owns quite a lot of hotels worldwide, maybe a mass boycott of those would hit him in the pocket, although I think I read somewhere he was the world's richest man, so maybe that wouldn't affect him that much. The west, or indeed any countries who think that these barbaric methods of punishment are unacceptable, should pull out all the stops to ostracise him, maybe a sustained effort along those lines might make him have a rethink.

Is the Sultan actually part of the government, or is he a figurehead like our queen?

Other largely or wholly Islamic countries have similar punishments for such things. Should we boycott them all?

Eloethan says it all!

EllaVannin It is not about tourists to Bahrain. Tourists who might fall within the remit of these punishments (and I guess that could be quite a few people) can decide not to go there and it is possible to alter one's behaviour temporarily to avoid falling foul of these laws.

It is about the people who live there, who should not have to live in fear of being stoned or flogged to death for behaviour, such as homosexuality and adultery, which the vast majority of people in this country would not even consider to be a crime.

Aside from the brutality of these laws, I understand from what was reported that they will be convicted if four witnesses attest to their crimes or if they confess - one wonders what sort of pressure will be brought to bear to elicit a confession - not much motivation to confess when you will be guaranteed a prolonged and agonising death. And witnesses might, in a number of scenarios, be lying of their own volition or being coerced into lying.

It is true that military interference in other countries - and often countries that were no danger to us - was disastrous and wrong. I don't agree with starting wars for economic or politically strategic reasons but I don't think anyone on here is suggesting we should invade Brunei - that would be madness.

However, we do not have to trade with countries that terrorise their people and treat women as inferior beings. We could cut off all economic and diplomatic contact. Companies - like the company where my son is employed - should cross the Dorchester off their functions list. We don't have to invite the sultan to this country and treat him as a decent human being and an honoured guest.

I wouldn't grace a system that flogs or stones people to death with the description "justice system". It is just sheer barbarism - and I think there's a reasonable probability that the behaviour of those in power is not constrained by the vile laws that they inflict on their subjects.

I can agree maddyone but then I was born and brought up in the UK.
People from totally different backgrounds have a different mindset as I'm sure you well know.
You cannot make them see that our way is a better way after all, we ignore stealing goods under a £200 value. We have repeat offenders cluttering up our prisons who, in many cases, have spent more time inside than out.
Our prisons are not a deterrent.
Brunei would laugh at our soft approach and you can see why.
Taxpayers money keeping offenders in what many countries would deem fairly comfortable conditions.

Stoning people to death is barbaric. So is cutting off a person’s hand, or foot. Surely it’s time for there to be a level of basic human decency in order for a country to be allowed to remain in The Commonwealth. Generally I don’t really believe in meddling in other countries affairs, but if countries want to have the benefits, whatever they are, of being in The Commonwealth, they should comply with basic levels of human decency, in my opinion.

maryeliza54
Fancy making a comment bringing the thread down to the lowest common denominator.
It's no laughing (or joking) matter.

We import a lot more than just oranges from SA so the chance of boycotting their products is virtually nil.
I myself lease containers to shipping companies via a broker and have no idea on a weekly basis where they go or what they are carrying.
I'm not spending my life worrying about problems in other countries.
It's enough to watch my own country being flogged.

<sighs and checks time of next weeks stoning in Guildford Market Place>

Only when our own house is in order should we possibly be able to articulate our feelings with regard to other Commonwealth countries and not before.
We interfere far too much.
Imagine another country interfering in our justice system, if one can call it justice.