A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Friday, June 7, 2019
Cruel, and no deterrent: why Australia’s policy on asylum seekers must change
Asylum seekers protest on Manus Island, Papua New Guinea, in this
picture taken from social media November 6, 2017. Source: Social Media
via Reuters

June 4 at 9:33 PM
THE Coalition’s election victory on May 18 had an immediate
psychological effect on the refugees on Manus Island, with reports of
several people attempting suicide.
Two class-action lawsuits currently before the High Court allege “torture”,
“persecution” and “other inhumane acts” in Australia’s offshore
detention centres. This action follows an action for damages in 2018
that the federal government settled for A$70 million, effectively admitting that the claims of mistreatment were well-founded.
The Iranian-Kurdish journalist and poet Behrouz Boochani, who has been detained on Manus for six years, has borne witness to a cruel system in his book, No Friend But the Mountain. Written secretly on a mobile phone, the book has won a swag of major Australian literary awards.
SEE ALSO: Australia votes for the fossil option
As a result of the testimonials of Boochani and others, the terrible
conditions on Nauru and Manus are well-known. There are regular reports
of physical and mental illness due to unsanitary conditions, cruel
treatment and hospitals with no capacity to deal with the extent and
severity of the health crisis among the refugee populations.
These reports reinforce the underlying cruelty of subjecting innocent
human beings to indefinite and arbitrary detention in the first place.
And to what end?
There is no justification for offshore detention
For many years, there has been no justification for the detention of asylum seekers on Manus and Nauru.
The original justification of deterring others from making the dangerous
journey from Indonesia to Australia carries no weight. The point has
been well and truly made that attempting to reach Australia by boat is a
futile exercise. In the words of the allegations in the class action,
the journey will result in years of:
…arbitrary, indefinite detention in tents, barrack-style buildings, or small, hastily constructed dwellings where living conditions lead to poor health […] physical, sexual and psychological abuses, [and] systemic mental distress.
The government claimed that the medivac law passed in February risked a new wave of boat arrivals and spent over A$180 million reopening
the Christmas Island detention centre in preparation for new arrivals.
The government has since committed to closing Christmas Island again.
The expense involved in this political exercise is staggering, with
absolutely no benefit to the taxpayer.
There has also been no new wave of boat arrivals. Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack revealed Thursday
that a boat from Sri Lanka had been intercepted near Christmas Island
this month. However, the details of who was on board, and why the boat
was in Australian waters has not been made publicly available.
There will always be the occasional refugee boat arriving Australian
waters for a variety of reasons, but it is important to distinguish
these isolated occurrences from a reigniting of the people-smuggling
trade.

Around 600 refugees remain barricaded inside Manus Detention Centre
after authorities closed the camp on Tuesday. October 31, 2017. Source:
Twitter
It’s high time the government ceased linking detention on Manus and
Nauru to stopping the boats. The evidence does not stack up. As I, and others, have argued previously, the experience during the Howard years suggests that simply the possibility of offshore detention is a sufficient deterrent.
When the government settled asylum seekers on Nauru in Australia and New
Zealand from 2002-04, without dismantling the offshore detention
regime, asylum seekers did not begin arriving by boat.
Most asylum seekers in Indonesia are registered with the UNHCR and are
waiting for resettlement through the UNHCR process. Their situation is
admittedly desperate. Nonetheless, when interviewed after the passing of
the medivac law, asylum seekers in Indonesia testified that they did not see taking a boat to Australia as an option.
It’s important to remember that asylum seekers have done nothing wrong
in seeking our protection. Australia is a signatory to the UNHCR Refugee Convention,
which establishes a responsibility to protect people who arrive on our
border seeking protection. If offshore detention can be justified as
deterrence at all, it must surely be kept to the bare minimum, in the
context of our protection obligations.
Long-term detention is simply cruel and rightly labelled a “crime against humanity”.
Alternatives to detention
If there is even a remote possibility of a boat arriving in response to
resettling refugees from Manus and Nauru in Australia and New Zealand,
the government has many deterrence strategies at its disposal.
One novel strategy that avoids the need for offshore detention is Labor’s 2011 Malaysia arrangement.
The deal was a simple one. In exchange for the transfer to Malaysia of
800 asylum seekers who arrived in Australia by boat, Australia would
provide financial assistance to Malaysia and resettle 4,000
UNHCR-recognised refugees on top of existing commitments to resettle
refugees from the region.

Refugee advocates hold placards and banners during a protest in central
Sydney, Australia, in 2016 calling for the closure of the Australian
detention centres in Nauru and Manus Island. Source: Reuters/David Gray
An important part of the arrangement was that those asylum seekers
returned to Malaysia would not be penalised, and would be provided with
housing, the right to work, and access to education for children.
The arrangement would act as an effective deterrent to people taking a
boat to Australia to seek asylum because their expensive and dangerous
journey would just result in their return to Malaysia. The Malaysia
arrangement had the benefit of refocusing Australia’s response to asylum
seekers and drawing in our neighbours to a regional response.
It’s critical that the Australian government take a new direction in
refugee policy and move beyond its tired and false rhetoric of
deterrence as a justification for detaining refugees on Nauru and Manus.
Alex Reilly, Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit, Adelaide Law School, University of Adelaide
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.



