McKinnon & Shaikh- Two Men, Two Crimes, Two Disabilities

I was sad to read this morning that China has executed Akmal Shaikh, 53, from London, for drug smuggling in 2007. If you’ve watched the news over the last week in between all your Christmas celebrations, you will know that the British government tried everything possible to save Mr Shaikh’s life. You may also know that Mr Shaikh’s family say that he has bipolar disorder, and that he went to China believing that he could become a pop star.

If you’ve been reading this blog, or following the news, over the last four months, you will have heard about Gary McKinnon, 46. For those who don’t know, Mr McKinnon has been accused of hacking into the Pentagon’s computer system. The British government want to extradite him to America for trial. He has Asperger’s Syndrome, and his mother, Janis Sharp, believes that he should not be sent away from the support that she and his family can give him in England. She wants him tried here. However, despite the efforts of Ms Sharp, several MPs and members of the public, Gordon Brown and Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, insist on extraditing McKinnon, claiming that the American government has assured them that his needs will be met there.

So, what is the difference between these cases? Why did the British government try so hard to save Mr Shaikh, using his mental illness as the reason why he didn’t know he was carrying drugs, when they seem to be happy to go against the wishes of Mr McKinnon and his mother, and his medical needs?

It’s simply about political relations between the countries. The British government, quite rightly, doesn’t support the death penalty. However, they also have very little to lose if they don’t have good relations with China.

They have more to lose if they keep Mr McKinnon in Britain, however, because they fear that would ruin their relations with America. The ‘special relationship’ that they have enjoyed for many years with the most powerful country in the world.

This is simply a case of double standards. The British government are risking Mr McKinnon’s health for their own political gain. But how can a relationship which makes a government risk the health and happiness of its citizens be special? Surely if Mr Shaikh’s life was worth fighting so hard to save, then Mr McKinnon’s health and happiness are also worth fighting for?

Politicians say they enter politics to help people. However, it seems that Gordon Brown and Alan Johnson have forgotten, somewhere along the way, that everyone is equal and should be treated equally. They need to be reminded that if, as a government, you try to help one person, you must then try to help all your people.  Otherwise you are simply not being fair.