Refugees

(Source: “Australia: Human Rights for Asylum-seekers”, AI-Australia) – Summarised by Marc Tutaan

The refugee campaign principally focuses on 3 areas:

1. Legislative Provisions

2. Mandatory Detention of Asylum-seekers

3. Women Refugees

1. Legislative Provisions

Amnesty raises concerns on 3 legislative changes:

a) Safe Haven Visas (SHVs)

The Safe Haven Visa class grants temporary protection in Australia to people who were displaced from their homes during armed conflict. These include Kosovar, East Timorese and Ambonese asylum-seekers. Amnesty’s primary concern is that the Australian government decides when it is safe enough for the refugees to be returned, regardless of whether the people still fear persecution. The government makes decisions about these refugees by reference to domestic policy, rather than to international law and human rights criteria. In this way, Safe Haven Visas do not provide refugees their right under international law to apply for asylum. Amnesty reminds the Australian government that refugees who are granted temporary protection remain refugees under international law and that determinations on their status as refugees should be made in reference to international human rights criteria.

b) Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs)

As of the 20 October 1999, those who arrive in Australia undocumented and are later granted refugee status will only be entitled to 3 year temporary protection visas. After 3 years they have to reapply to determine their status again. During the 3 year TPV period, they have reduced access to social services including language courses, job training programs, etc. Amnesty is concerned that a two class refugee system is being established in Australia. That is, those who arrive with documentation and those that arrive as undocumented asylum-seekers. The concern is that many people (e.g. in Iran) have to flee their country without the requisite identification. Upon arrival in Australia, this latter stream receive tenuous, temporary protection because of their manner of arrival.

c) Border Protection Amendment Act

The Border Protection Act, introduced in 1999, focuses on the question of to whom Australia is obliged to provide protection. Under this legislation, a person is required to take all possible steps to reside in the first country they have access to, before they are entitled to protection from Australia. Also, an asylum-seeker is barred from lodging a refugee application if the asylum-seeker has resided in a country for more than 7 days prior to arriving in Australia. If a formal technical right to reside temporarily or permanently in another country exists, even if the country cannot offer substantive protection and even if the country has not signed the UN Refugee Convention, then this may thwart a refugee application. For example, a Libyan asylum-seeker may have arrived in Australia via Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Indonesia. If this person spent more than 7 days in Indonesia, they could be deported to Indonesia. However, Indonesia is not a party to the Refugee Convention and is unlikely to be able to offer effective protection. Hence the person may be deported, indirectly, to the place from which he/she fled!

2. Mandatory Detention of Asylum-seekers

Introduced in 1994, this policy means that anyone who arrives in Australia undocumented (i.e. without a valid visa) is mandatorily and automatically detained. These people are held in detention centres, such as those in Villawood (NSW), Woomera (SA) or Port Hedland (WA). Amnesty recognises that the government needs to detain people for such purposes as verifying a person’s identity, dealing with cases of destroyed/lost identification documents, or for the interests of national security. In this respect, Amnesty has no objection to mandatory detention to satisfy minimal requirements.

But Amnesty raises concerns when there is excessive or inappropriate lengths of detention. For example, there are cases where people have stayed for up to 4 years in a detention centre whilst their cases are being determined. If these people do not pose a threat to society, if the minimal conditions have been satisfied, why can’t they be released into the community whilst they wait for their case to be heard? Amnesty objects to this needless deprivation of liberty. Amnesty suggests that lengths of detention should be subject to judicial scrutiny rather than being processed by the Department of Immigration and controlled by ministerial discretion. This would bring some accountability into the system.

Amnesty is concerned that detention may be used as a penalty or act as a deterrent to asylum-seekers, which would contravene international human rights standards. Under Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention (1951), detention of asylum-seekers should not be used as a penalty. This article has been interpreted by UNHCR as meaning that detention should only be used as a last resort. This is in contrast to the way that Australian policy operates. Amnesty is also concerned about the conditions within detention centres. It is concerned that people who have suffered torture and trauma are being subjected to insensitive and even harsh conditions. Amnesty suggests that there should be more trained psychologists to identify and treat detainees suffering torture and trauma syndromes.

3. Women Refugees

Women and children make up 80% of the world’s refugees. While women are subjected to the same human rights violations as males, they are also subjected to gender specific violations such as “honour killings”, rape and forced prostitution. Amnesty is concerned that the Australian government has taken the stance when assessing applications for asylum that these gender specific violations do not amount to persecution under the Refugee Convention. Back to top.

Torture

This is our big focus area for the remainder of the year. This year’s Candle Day (October 21-22) will carry the theme of “Stamp Out Torture!”. See AI’s official site for more details. Back to top.

Women

No report as yet. Back to top.