The following report was written by Professor John Melville-Jones of the University of Western Australia, following the termination of a complaint made against him, the University and the Australian Macedonian Advisory Council by a Slav-Macedonian organisation based in Perth. AMAC’s press release regarding this matter can be found here:
In October 2010, Professor Meville-Jones delivered a speech at AMAC’s Annual Function regarding the decision of the government of FYROM to build a 22-metre tall statue of Alexander the Great in Skopje. His speech made reference to the history of historical revisionism on the part of former communist regime of Yugoslavia in fostering a “Macedonian” national identity, a process which was then continued by the government of FYROM, following the break-up of Yugoslavia. The speech also made reference to Slav-Macedonian organisations in the diaspora that have consumed and taken on these historical distortions. Shortly after, AMAC published the speech as an article on its website and in its newsletter. On 11 May 2011, the MCA itself made a complaint regarding the article to the Australian Human Rights Commission against Professor Melville-Jones and the University of Western Australia (which the complainant alleged was vicariously liable as the Professor’s employer). Over four months later, on 29 September 2011, the complainants decided to add AMAC as a third respondent to the complaint on the basis that AMAC should be liable for having published the Professor’s article. The article is available at this address: http://www.macedonian.com.au/ACTION_ALERT/action_alerts/The-Importance-of-Historical-Truth-and-The-Macedonian-Issue/)
Here is the Professor's reply:
Dear AMAC,
Now that the dust has settled, and the Australian Human Rights Commission has completed its procedures, I can say something about what happened.
In the first place, I should apologise for causing you so much trouble. The fault was mine. I was careless. I said in my after-dinner speech at the end of 2010 that I had met some people who had come from (the former) Yugoslav (Republic of ) Macedonia in Perth, and that although they were good citizens, many of them were not well educated.
In the context of my speech I meant that they had not been correctly taught about the history in ancient times of their country of origin, which did not become a part of Macedonia until after the Roman conquest. Because this fact had been concealed from them, they believed that it was OK to claim that Alexander the Great was one of them, and erect a statue of him (and some of them may even believe that they are the descendants of the earliest inhabitants of Macedonia). But because I didn’t make it clear that I was thinking of the way in which they had been ‘educated’ in the ancient history of their country, it was possible to take my statement out of its context and create this complaint.
My comparison of them with naked persons who were trying to steal the clothing of others, and jackdaws parading around in the feathers of peacocks, because they were attempting to connect themselves with Alexander the Great was also mentioned in the complaint, but was not treated as seriously.
So here is my report. There were long delays in arranging the meeting, because someone was unavailable, and then the Conciliator for the Australian Human Rights Commission had to withdraw at the last moment in November and couldn’t be replaced at short notice, and after that everything fell into the Christmas black hole, so we didn’t meet until March.
The complainants presented an impressive array of legal talent. They employed a barrister, and the rule is that a barrister must be ‘instructed’ by a solicitor, so there were two lawyers on the other side. I don’t know whether the solicitor, who had a Slavic surname, was acting pro bono and not charging, but the barrister would certainly have been expensive.
We were there for four hours. It cost me $1.25. My advanced age entitles me to free bus travel between 9.00 and 3.30, but because the meeting began at 9.30 I had to pay my fare one way.
The University of Western Australia (UWA), which was joined in the complaint as a second respondent on the basis that it was vicariously liable, was represented by its salaried General Counsel who did not receive any special payment for attendance. On the other hand, much more than four billable hours at barrister’s rates (the meeting plus ‘receiving instructions’, plus all the billable hours spent in reading documents, making telephone calls, photocopying documents and whatever else lawyers do), must have been very expensive for the other side. The proceedings were not recorded, or if they were, no minutes are available. We were enjoined to observe confidentiality, so I can’t go into details. All that I can say is that the barrister had a sweet voice, and she didn’t seem to think that I had done anything very terrible.
The complainants had demanded three separate apologies from me, the UWA and from AMAC, and the right to compose a statement which would be posted on AMAC’s web site. In the end, however, they accepted my offer to create an ‘expression of regret’ for causing offence to them by saying that they were not well educated, one which would also state that they were good Australian citizens (which I had also said in my after-dinner speech). Also, I suggested that the last paragraph of the speech, which had been placed on AMAC’s web site, and described them as ‘not well educated’, should be removed. This has now been done, and the Commission has determined that the matter is now terminated, on the basis that the complainant no longer wishes to pursue it.
Their web site now announces that I ‘regret my remarks’. This is not true. My statement expressed regret for making one remark which, when taken out of context, could be interpreted as meaning that their level of general education was poor. Of course, I do not regret anything else. Their web site also states that the Vice-Chancellor of UWA ‘agreed’ to meet them. This is again not correct. The Vice-Chancellor, on his own initiative, invited them to meet him, so that he could make it clear that the UWA does not discriminate against any ethnic group.
I wonder why they went to such lengths. The only explanation that occurs to me is that since I was speaking the truth when I pointed out that their country was not a part of the kingdom of Alexander the Great, and my position entitles me to speak with authority about matters relating to ancient history, and even more because I am not a Greek, some hotheads among them might have considered that I was dangerous, and should therefore be silenced.
I feel sorry for them, because they have spent a lot of money and haven’t got much out of it. It is a pity that there couldn’t have been a different approach from this formal complaint to the Human Rights Commission. In fact, something better might have happened, because towards the end of 2010 I was invited to attend one of their meetings – I think that it was one at which a film was to be shown. I couldn’t accept the invitation, because I was going to be away from Perth on that evening, and it wasn’t repeated.
If I had gone, I would have hoped to engage in a civilised discussion of the naming dispute, and could have suggested ways in which both countries could improve their relationship, starting with a recommendation that they should accept the revised and reasonable Greek position, that their country should be called North Macedonia (or its name qualified in some other way). I support this, because since their country has been a part of an administrative district called Macedonia since the second century B.C., the name should not be entirely denied to them.
Perhaps I am too optimistic, particularly now that it has been announced that a statue representing Philip II has been erected in Skopje. This means that the government of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is persisting in its false claims.
Now to the meeting with my Vice-Chancellor. This was a very civilised occasion, with much general discussion of principles, and the European economy. A mini-lecture on the subject of the recent history of their country was offered at one stage. Much of this was correct, but some of it was either incorrect or highly selective. Nothing surprising there. Alexander the
Great didn’t rate a mention. I kept my mouth shut, because there was no point in getting into arguments on this occasion. The Vice-Chancellor not only made some general remarks about the current situation in Europe, but took care to stress that this university does not discriminate against any ethnic group. This, of course, was the purpose of the meeting.
After it was over, I went off with them and told them some things about the history of the original buildings constructed on this site in the 1930s (I am preparing a little book about these buildings for our centenary next year). They found this interesting, because they were all graduates of UWA. We then had some general chitchat. They complained about the policy that has been followed by the Greek government of refusing entry to Greece to persons who might have been engaged in anti-Greek activities in the past, even when it was for reasons such as family funerals. I wish that I knew more about this, because each side tells a different story, and I am not competent to judge matters of this kind.
One thing pleased me. When I said that if their government would accept the title of North Macedonia, this would lead to a considerable easing of tensions, and that there were ways in which the relationship could be improved after that, the immediate response by two out of the three of them was that this was acceptable. That was an interesting reaction, and I will pursue this matter.
This process has been interesting for me, and it has led to my investigating a number of things that I would otherwise not have known anything about. The result of all this activity is that I have decided to spend some time over the next year or so expanding the little pamphlet called ‘The Myth of Modern Macedonia’ that I created in March 2011, perhaps turning it into a small book, with maps, a discussion of the ancient sources, and so on. I feel as if the spirits of Philip of Macedon and Alexander the Great are directing my efforts.
John Melville-Jones
References macedoniahellenicland
FYROM group drops frivolous complaint against AMAC
Posts
