FOUR Sarawakians had been held captive by the Abu Sayyaf militants for 68 days. With efforts from all the relevant parties, they were finally released and returned home safely.
Back in their hometown Sibu, they knelt down in front of the public in gratitude of the contributions from the public and the police to secure their freedom.
However, their release also raised the question of where the donations from the public have gone to. The hostages’ families revealed RM12 million (including RM9 million raised from the public) was handed over to the authorities in Sabah.
However, on the subject of ransom, the official stance has turned from ‘never paying ransom’ to confusion, prompting queries as to the whereabouts of the funds raised. Could the four hostages have returned home safely without paying any ransom?
Special Branch director Datuk Seri Mohammad Fuzi Harun said it was ‘inconvenient’ for the police to respond as “governments around the world do not recognise payment of ransom to terrorist organisations.”
Indeed, it’s hard on the police. If the hostages were killed because no ransom was paid, the public was bound to condemn the police for inaction. By the same token, if the police did not admit to paying ransom, the public would still question the whereabouts of the money raised.
What we have here is a situation where a favourable outcome is impossible. Apportioning blame wantonly will only muddle the situation further – not clear it up.
A resolution passed by the UN Security Council urges governments not to pay any form of ransom demanded by terrorists or make any political concession in effort to secure the release of the hostages. It’s an international consensus.
This is because the payment of ransom is tantamount to incentivising terrorist groups to commit more acts of terror. Ransom payment will only serve to swell the abductors’ pockets with ill-gotten largesse and the thought of getting flushed with easy money will embolden them to commit more crimes.
The frequent hostage-takings off the Sabah coast in recent years could be attributed to the porous boundary in the Sulu Sea separating the northern Borneo State and the southern Philippines but it may also be closely related to the payoffs to the kidnappers. David S Cohen who previously served in the US Treasury Department and currently the deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), once said: “Ransoms have become the most important source of Income for most terrorist organisations today and ransoms are usually paid by the authorities as ‘humanitarian assistance.’”
A ransom paid will only give birth to another one. Thus, some countries such as the US, the UK and Canada are standing firm against paying any form of ransom to terrorist groups. The US will sometimes rescue its hostages through trade-offs with terrorist groups for the release of the latter’s operatives held in US prisons or by bringing out its army. But overall, western powers stick to the principle of not bowing to the demands for ransom to send a clear message that they do not negotiate with terrorists.
The price is high with the hostages frequently getting executed like the Canadian who was beheaded by the Abu Sayyaf after the ‘ransom’ deadline expired. The terrorists made good their threat by chopping off the hostage’s head.
Most governments of the world are caught between a rock and a hard place when their citizens are abducted by terrorist groups for ransom. If the pay up, they will be seen as giving in to the demands of the kidnappers. If they don’t, they will be seen as abandoning their own citizens and wilfully leaving them to die terrible deaths at the hands of their captors.
So the question is to pay or not to pay? It’s a tough question as such matters involve serious moral and ethical issues that are excruciatingly painful to address.
As one observer noted: “Giving in to murderous terrorists is horrible. But giving up on the lives of innocent human beings in the name of a principle when there might be real and serious possibilities of saving them is worse.”
There are tough choices to make, no doubt, but unfortunately, easy solutions are hard to come in tackling such a battle of attrition.