Bridging religious divide

That there can be no place for politics of hate in a democracy has been amply demonstrated by a court in New Zealand, which abolished death penalty in 1989. It has pronounced life sentence without parole — the first in the history of that country — on Brenton Tarrant, an Australian in his late twenties, who opened fire at unarmed congregations at two mosques in Christchurch in March last year. The act of violence resulted in 51 deaths. In addition, Tarrant faced the charge of attempted murder of another 40 people. Though his family said it was his travel through Asia and Europe that changed his views, turning him into a white supremacist, he might have had a reason for xenophobia closer home, for Australia itself has seen attacks against immigrants in the past.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern described it as a terrorist attack, stating that Tarrant would now have ‘no notoriety, no platform, and we have no cause to think about him, to see him or to hear from him again’. For those who lost their family members, the decision is expected to bring a measure of healing and closure of a chapter of hatred. It also amounts to rebuttal of an ideology that hopes to create rift on racial, religious, cultural and political grounds. Tarrant wanted to influence ideological conflict within the United States over the ownership of firearms, the latest instance of violence in Wisconsin after the police shooting of a black man lending credence to his thinking. It’s not surprising that New Zealand made its gun laws stricter after the 2019 incident.

The Christchurch shootings showed how social media can be used to disturb social cohesion, for the violence was live-streamed by the perpetrator. The court has exhibited firmness by not dithering in its pursuit of justice and in the manner of dispensing it. Ethnocentric views are out of place in an inter-dependent world and extremity a sign of alienation. An inclusive society needs to guard against it.