Archive
Boat Arrivals, Australia and Human Rights
Australia’s policy of imprisoning all asylum seekers who travel to Australia by boat has been strongly criticized by human rights supporters. During a visit to Australia in May 2011 the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, urged the Australian Government to end the mandatory detention policy. Amnesty International has repeatedly condemned the policy, saying Australia needs to do more to protect the rights of asylum seekers and refugees. Despite this, it is unlikely that the policy of mandatory detention will be changed.
Partly responding to the criticism of human rights campaigners, the Australian Government announced that asylum seekers arriving by boat could be granted Bridging Visas in November 2011. The Bridging Visas would allow asylum seekers to live in the community while their applications for refugee status were decided. According to the Immigration Department, however, bridging visas are granted on a case by case basis and priority is given to the most vulnerable and those who have been in detention for a long time. The behavior of asylum seekers in detention is also taken into account. Since November only 107 asylum seekers have been let out of detention on bridging visas and 4,409 people remain locked up.
The possibility of Bridging Visas for asylum seekers arriving by boat is a step towards a more gentle response to boat arrivals but it does not mean the end of compulsory detention. Historically, Australia’s policies towards boat arrivals have got harsher when the number of people arriving by boat increases. Mandatory detention laws were introduced in Australia in 1992 by the then Labor government in response to the increasing numbers of asylum seekers from Vietnam, China, and Cambodia trying to reach Australia by boat. The law said that Australian Courts were not allowed to review the decision to detain asylum seekers but said that they could not be detained for longer than 273 (approximately nine months). In 1994 the same government changed the law again, making it even harsher by ruling that mandatory detention could last indefinitely for anyone who came to Australia by boat without a valid visa.
In 2001, in response to the increasing numbers of asylum seekers arriving by boat, the then Liberal Government (led by John Howard) introduced the Pacific Solution. Before 2001, the highest number of asylum seekers boats to arrive in Australia was 19, carrying a total of 660 asylum seekers. In 2001, 43 boats arrived carrying 5,516 asylum seekers. Responding to this increase, the Australian government declared that the Australian islands between Indonesia and the Australian mainland were no longer part of Australia’s migration zone and all asylum seekers arriving by boat would be taken to a detention centre on the tiny island of Nauru. Many of the asylum seekers in Nauru were detained for years. The number of boats arriving dropped dramatically.
In 2008, the newly elected Labor government (this time led by Kevin Rudd) announced that it was ending the Pacific Solution but that some aspects of the detention system would stay the same. Asylum seekers arriving by boat would still have their refugee status determined offshore (on Christmas Island) but they would be let out of detention faster. In October 2010, the new Labor Prime Minister, Julia Gillard said that more changes would be made to the policy so that children and families could stay in community-based accommodation instead of the detention centre. However, since 2008, the number of boats arriving has steadily increased. In 2010 134 boats carried 6,879 asylum seekers to Australia.
Because the numbers of asylum seekers have increased so dramatically, it is likely that mandatory detention will continue to be used as a deterrent. Both of the major political parties in Australia remain convinced of the need for offshore processing and are just debating about where it will take place. The detention center in Nauru is one of the options being discussed. Amnesty International has said that the prospect of reopening Nauru is “horrifying” because “asylum seekers were locked up for years, away from lawyers, media, human rights advocates and community support. They were often not given proper information about what was happening and what rights they had.” Amnesty believes that there is a declining respect for the human rights of asylum seekers in Australia.
First Forced Deportation of Afghan Asylum-seeker from Australia Delayed
The Australian Government’s decision to force the deportation of a failed Afghan asylum-seeker for the first time has been temporarily stopped by Australian courts.
Ismail Mirza Jan, 26 years old, fled Afghanistan as a teenager in 2001, three years after his father was killed by the Taliban. He reportedly travelled to Pakistan, Iran and Greece before applying for asylum in Britain. His application was rejected in Britain and then in Ireland, but he was able to live temporarily in Ireland on humanitarian grounds. He arrived in Australia in February 2010 using a false Turkish passport.
He is currently in maximum security at the Villawood Immigration Detention Centre in Sydney after his refugee application was rejected. His application was also rejected by the Refugee Review Tribunal and Australian courts.
Mr Mirza will be charged $2,000 to be flown to Afghanistan and another $30,000 for Australian officials who will need to accompany him.
The Australian Government ordered his removal to Kabul on 15 November 2011. This would have been the first time an Afghan asylum-seeker has been sent home against their wishes because of a deal to return Afghans between Australia, Afghanistan and the UN Refugee Agency. The agreement between them was signed in January 2011. Australia says the agreement allows Australia to force the deportation of Afghans who do not qualify for refugee status and protection.
On Wednesday 16 November lawyers for Mr Mirza applied to the Australian Federal Court to stop his deportation, planned for Saturday 19 November. His lawyer argued that deporting Mr Mirza would go against the Migration Act. His lawyer also says that his client was denied justice because the Government never informed him of the reasons for rejecting his refugee application.
The Court issued a temporary order to stop his forced removal to Kabul until his case can be heard. A refugee activist said the case would probably not be heard until next year.
It is believed that travel documents issued by the Afghan government will expire at the end of January. Documents shown at Court showed that the Afghan government has already approved the deportation.
There are currently 1,246 Afghans in detention in Australia. If this deportation goes ahead, it is likely that more Afghans will be forced to return to Afghanistan if found not to be genuine refugees.
Malaysia Plan Still an Option for Australia’s Government
The Australian Government’s plan to send asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat to Malaysia is still up in the air after debate on the law to allow offshore processing was delayed this morning because the Government did not have the votes.
The Government was going to introduce the law for debate today. After it became clear that they would lose the vote, they held an emergency cabinet meeting and delayed the vote for a later date.
The politician with the deciding vote, Mr Crook, said last night that he would not support the changes. He said that the new law could stop asylum seekers trying to get to Australia by boat but he was worried about how the asylum seekers, especially children, would be treated in Malaysia.
Malaysia has not signed the United Nation’s Refugee Convention.
But Mr Crook said that he would support the law changes proposed by the Opposition because these would allow offshore processing in countries which have signed the Refugee Convention – like Nauru.
Nauru has recently signed the Refugee Convention and the Opposition would like asylum seekers arriving by boat to be sent there instead of Malaysia.
The Opposition says that the offshore processing centre in Nauru was successful in protecting Australia’s borders and deterring people smuggling.
The system, often called the Pacific Solution, was implemented by the Opposition between 2001 and 2007. The Leader of the Opposition says that Nauru is a “proven solution for offshore processing”.
Almost all Australian politicians support offshore processing at the moment, suggesting that the Government and the Opposition only need to agree on which country the asylum seekers arriving by boat will be sent.
The Government said this morning that they “remained committed” to the Malaysia swap deal.
Refugee Experiences of Integration in Foreign Countries
Many people are leaving their homelands to go to foreign countries for employment, a better life, security and protection, or education. People migrate to escape their problems at home but there are always new problems that they have to deal with when they get to a new country. Whether migrating legally or illegally, these migrants and refugees often have difficulty integrating and becoming a part of the community in the destination country.
According to recent studies, the most common problems new migrants and refugees have are:
- Communicating because they lack the language skills;
- Difficulties finding an adequate job and suitable housing;
- Having foreign credentials/qualifications recognized; and,
- Building a social network because of cultural differences.
Many people migrate for economic reasons, believing that there is a job for them in a foreign country. However finding a job in a foreign country is not easy. A study in Australia found that many refugees were forced to work in low-paid jobs because of discrimination and barriers to participation, such as a lack of local work experience and the fact that educational qualifications in poorer countries are not recognized in foreign destinations. The study said that the challenges they faced were so bad, that many found it “extremely difficult to go on with day-to-day living”.
Also, while some migrants are lucky enough to get a job and earn more than they would in their home country, they also have to spend more to survive. In 2006, half of the refugees in Australia earned less than $250 per week. This may sound like a lot of money but the cost of living in Australia is high. In 2010 Sydney was ranked as the 24th most expensive city in the world. The cost of bread in the Australia is $2.50, which is 2,746 Tomans or 120 Afghanis. Lamb is $16 per kilo, which is 17,579 Tomans or 760 Afghanis. That is not even considering other important living expenses. The Australian Bureau of Statistics found in 2010 that average housing costs were $223 per week, 245,010 Tomans or 10,592 Afghanis.
The UK is another popular destination for refugees and migrants, attracting thousands of people each year. The UK Home office interviewed refugees on their experiences of integration.
One refugee said: “I think the first barrier is language barrier. I hadn’t any help even with someone who knows English and my language. Even in the shops – when they didn’t give change in the shops. For us to explain it was so difficult”.
Refugees also worried about unfriendly and racist attitudes in the community.
“You can feel you are settled in but they say, `you foreigners…. Go home’ again; they don’t say `Hello’ not warm, not friendly.”
“[They were] hitting me with a ball… calling me names, you know and you are talking about children of 10 going down. Calling me names, telling me, ‘Go back to your country!’ cursing and talking funny and … you just don’t know what to do”.
To stay out of trouble and keep safe refugees sometimes have to isolate themselves from the community.
“I have not made any effort so far to try and talk to neighbors or do anything about that because I don’t want trouble… where I lived before here, I learned to keep to myself because that way you avoid trouble”.
A wide range of factors support and undermine the process of integration. These include social factors such as the characteristics of refugees (ability to speak the foreign language) and the characteristics of the wider community (such as the level of racism and discrimination towards foreigners). Economic factors such as employment and income also affect a refugee’s ability to integrate. People think that life in foreign countries must be better and easier than life at home, but life is not easy anywhere in the world.
Australia sticks to Malaysia plan
Prime Minister Ms. Julia Gillard and Immigration Minister Chris Bowen announced that the government would change the migration law after a High Court decision that put in doubt the Malaysian refugee swap deal and other forms of offshore processing.
Ms. Gillard said the amendments would simply restore the understanding of the Migration Act that existed prior to the High Court’s decision. The processing of asylum-seekers in other countries would be allowed and the Government would have the power to decided where they should be sent.
Ms. Gillard says the Government is determined to continue to implement the agreement with Malaysia.
Under the Malaysian deal, Australia would send the next 800 asylum-seekers that arrive by boat to Malaysia in exchange for 4,000 processed and recognized refugees.
The government’s advice remained that the Malaysian agreement would send a strong message to people-smugglers and deter asylum-seekers from making the dangerous sea journey by boat.
“That is why Malaysia, when we announced it, was the best option for smashing the people smugglers’ business model. It remains the best option”, Ms. Gillard says.
The government would also use the changes to send asylum seekers to Papua New Guinea.
The Government insists the new policy will fulfill Australia’s obligations under the United Nations convention.
The proposed changes will be introduced to Australia’s Parliament next week for approval.
Australia is currently detaining all asylum-seekers arriving by boat, including several hundred in a Centre on Christmas Island which has seen riots in recent months.
Changes to Australia’s asylum-seeker policies
There have been many changes in Australia’s policies towards asylum-seekers in the last six weeks. Some of them have been perceived as good for asylum-seekers that want to go there and some have been seen as bad. One thing that has not changed though is Australia’s commitment to break the people-smuggling business and to stop asylum-seekers making the dangerous journey to Australia by boat.
Tomorrow the Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard will present a new policy to deal with asylum-seekers. Media reports suggest that the government will now try to change the Migration Act – the law controlling immigration to Australia – so the deal with Malaysia will become legal and Australia will be able to process asylum-seekers off-shore.
On 31 August, the High Court rejected the deal, saying that under existing law, Australia could not transfer asylum-seekers to another country unless that nation was bound by law to protect them. Refugee activists that argued the case for asylum-seekers in court say they are disappointed the government could now change the law.
While the Malaysia solution is likely to be revived, the government also has a few other options to consider. While waiting for the High Court decision, the government signed an agreement with Papua New Guinea to reopen a detention centre on Manus Island to receive newly arriving asylum-seekers for processing. There has also been discussion of making a deal with Nauru to reopen a detention centre there.
If you are being told that now is the time to go to Australia then be careful because things can change quickly again. With all the options I described it could even get worse for asylum-seekers going there.
High Court stops Australia from sending asylum-seekers to Malaysia
The High Court ruling on Wednesday 31 August 2011 prevents the Australian government from transferring 800 asylum-seekers to Malaysia under the swap deal it signed last month.
The plan to send asylum-seekers to Malaysia was a part of Australia’s regional response to stop thousands of boat people who arrive in Australia every year.
The High Court ruled by a majority of six to one that the Immigration Minister could not send asylum-seekers to any country that was not “legally bound by international or domestic law to provide access for asylum-seekers to effective procedures for assessing their need for protection”.
The court said in a statement that Malaysia has not signed the UN Refugee Convention and that there was no guarantee that refugees would be recognized and protected under Malaysia’s domestic law.
The Immigration Minister Chris Bowen called the high court ruling “profoundly disappointing”.Bowen said the government’s plans to send asylum-seekers to Malaysia for processing had acted as a deterrent to those thinking of making the dangerous journey to Australia.
Many have died on that journey, including dozens who drowned last December when their boat smashed on rocks on the island in heavy seas.
Mr. Bowen said: “We’ve had the people smugglers in retreat. Now, today’s decision is a significant blow, but it does not undermine my or the government’s determination to break the people smugglers’ model.”
The case was brought to court on behalf of 16 asylum-seekers who were a part of the first group of asylum-seekers to be sent to Malaysia. The lawyer acting for them, David Manne, said his clients were very relieved.
For now, the 335 asylum-seekers who arrived to Australia since the Malaysian deal was signed will remain in detention on Christmas Island but it is unclear whether they will be processed in Australia or elsewhere.
The Australian government is still considering other countries for its regional approach and it recently signed an agreement with Papua New Guinea to reopen the Manus Island detention facility there.
Decision to send asylum-seekers to Malaysia will be made next week
The High Court of Australia met on 22 and 23 August to consider the lawfulness of the Australian Government’s plan to send 800 asylum-seekers to Malaysia.
On August 8, refugee lawyers requested that the High Court prevent the Australian Government from sending the first group of 16 asylum-seekers to Malaysia under a deal that was made on 25 July to send 800 newly arriving boat people to Malaysia. In exchange Australia would accept 4,000 refugees registered with the UN in Malaysia over four years.
This week the High Court heard the legal arguments of refugee and government lawyers.
Refugee lawyers argue that Australian Immigration Minister Chris Bowen does not have the power to send asylum-seekers to Malaysia because Malaysia has not signed the UN Refugee Convention and therefore has no legal obligations to protect the asylum-seekers. The lawyers also argue that sending unaccompanied minors to Malaysia is not in their best interests.
Government lawyers say the agreement and declaration of Malaysia as a suitable destination is legal and does meet the obligations Australia has under the UN Refugee Convention. Australia’s only obligation is to ensure protection of those with a well-founded fear of persecution.
Government lawyers told the court that Australia could declare a country a suitable place to send asylum-seekers regardless of whether it was a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention or have relevant domestic laws, which is consistent with the previous Government’s policy of sending asylum-seekers to Nauru.
After hearing both sides of the case, the High Court will deliver its verdict on Wednesday 31 August. Until then no asylum-seekers will be sent to Malaysia.
Five boats carrying 335 asylum-seekers, including 92 children of whom 39 are unaccompanied minors have arrived in Australia since the government signed the Malaysia deal on July 25.
Australia to reopen Manus Island detention centre
Australia’s High Commissioner to Papua New Guinea and Papua New Guinea’s Foreign Affairs and Immigration minister signed a memorandum of understanding in Port Moresby on 19 August to reopen Manus Island detention centre for asylum seekers.
Under the deal, Australia will send newly arriving asylum-seekers to the Pacific nation for processing and will provide financial assistance to support the establishment and operations of the detention centre.
The memorandum says the establishment of an “assessment centre” will be a visible deterrent to people smugglers. It also says special arrangements will be made for “vulnerable cases, including unaccompanied minors”.
Australian Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen says the signing of the MOU is an ”important development”. He also said the deal sent a clear message that countries in the region were working together “to ensure the integrity of our borders and undermine people smuggling networks”.
The two countries will now work together on plans to establish the detention centre, however many of the details are still unclear, including how much it will cost and how many people the centre will hold. Mr Bowen said that the centre would take “several weeks” to be reopened but it would happen as soon as possible.
Manus Island is located near the equator, some 400 kilometers north of the Papua New Guinea`s mainland. The detention centre was used by the former government of Prime Minister John Howard until 2004, and became infamous for its appalling conditions. A number of asylum- seekers detained there attempted suicide in a desperate attempt to draw attention to their plight.
Human rights and refugee groups have criticized plans to reopen the Manus Island detention centre, Amnesty International Australia refugee spokesman Dr Graham Thom has said “in both cases (Malaysia and Papua New Guinea) Australia is outsourcing its humanitarian obligations to developing countries and worsening the trauma of refugees who have fled conflict, persecution and torture.”
However, unlike Malaysia, where Australia also intends to send asylum-seekers, Papua New Guinea has signed the UN Refugee Convention.
Mr Bowen said that the signing of the memorandum of understanding commits both governments to treating detainees with dignity and respect in accordance with the United Nations convention on refugees, processing them as quickly as possible and at no cost to the Papua New Guinean government.
Australian treasurer Wayne Swan said the government was determined to break the people smuggling business model. “The message to the people smugglers and to all of those considering coming is that if they come here, they will be processed in another country.”
The signing of the document happened on the same day another boat of 71 asylum seekers was intercepted off the coast of Christmas Island.
Australia makes another regional asylum-seeker deal
Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Peter O’Neill confirmed that he has approved the re-opening of the Manus Island detention centre to accept asylum seekers from Australia.
Prime Minister Peter O’Neill says that the centre will be managed and paid for by the Australian Government. He says that the details of the arrangement, such as how many people will be sent to the island, are yet to be finalized. It is up to the Australian Government to determine how soon the centre can open.
Immigration Minister Chris Bowen says it will be at least several weeks before asylum seekers can be sent to Manus Island as facilities need to be upgraded.
The government has been under pressure to find a second regional offshore processing point, especially as the arrangement with Kuala Lumpur is limited to 800 asylum seekers and the High Court has challenged whether unaccompanied minors can be sent to the Malaysian country as it has not signed the UN convention to protect the rights of refugees.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard says a memorandum of understanding will soon be signed on the Manus Island centre. Earlier she said the Government’s Malaysian solution would continue despite Papua New Guinea’s offer to house asylum seekers.
“We’re determined to deliver the Malaysia arrangement and that is before the High Court now,” she said.
Mr. Bowen says the arrangement to send asylum seekers to Manus Island for processing will complement the government’s refugee swap deal with Malaysia.
He also gave a message for those asylum seekers who are thinking of coming to Australia: “You may be sent to Malaysia or Papua New Guinea, but you’re not going to be processed in Australia.”
iranianasylumseeker 