Asylum Violation Summary

(1) Billy cannot file a petition for asylum on behalf of relative minor child Jane because Billy is neither Jane’s parent nor a court ordered guardian. (2) Jane, on the other hand, has within one year of entering the United States in which to seek a claim for asylum, regardless of her age. (3) Jane’s refusal to return to her country of origin is under the pretense she is subject to physical abuse by her father and she fears persecution, or has a well-founded fear of persecution, due to her race, religion,

Throughout the years, there have been articles about asylum seekers resorting to violence due to discontentment with the Australian government regarding the assessment of their refugee status. These are evident cries for help which sparks off debates on the government’s abilities to find a successful solution to the asylum issues. Australia has been criticized due to the requirements of compulsory immigration detention for ‘all unlawful non-citizens, (including asylum seekers)’ (Phillips & Spinks 2013, p.1). The other controversial issue of Australia regarding the asylum seekers is also the claims that it has been avoiding it’s responsibilities under the United Nations refugee conventions by making it hard for asylum seekers to claim

Australia, among many places, has legal restrictions and conventions in reference to the captivity and treatment of asylum seekers. These are seen through the ‘1951 Refugee Convention’ and it’s 1967 protocol. Legal guidelines are also seen in significant human rights treaties.

the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty guidelines issued by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, including the Revised Guidelines on Applicable Criteria and Standards Relating to the Detention of Asylum

Unlike in other domestic court proceedings, the US government does not appoint a legal advisor to unaccompanied children seeking asylum; hence, they do not have anyone that advocates for their interest and welfare. Without English skills or a legal advisor, unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and

Another important stakeholder in this issue is the children themselves. Almost all of the children present in detention centres are asylum seekers whom arrived in Australia by boat, and are classified as ‘unauthorised maritime arrivals’ (Humanrights.gov.au, 2015). These asylum seeker children all held the same responses to some degree. Their responses were all surrounded by the main aspect of ‘Wanting to be free and safe’.

The article begins with former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, head of the Global Citizenship Commission, proposing to the UN that a court should be set up to assess crimes that have been committed against children. The current refugee crisis has created a dire need for a court to investigate child labor, slavery, and marriage. The court would be able to take charge of cases petitioned by children and issue irrevocable rulings. Since so many children’s rights have been violated, someone needs to speak up on their behalf. The U.N. Children’s Fund has recently addressed the issue of the lack of protection in Europe from human traffickers. The Global Citizenship Commission includes very qualified individuals that have not only suggested for a children’s court, but they also have advocated for reform in U.N. refugee aid and veto processes.

Asylum seekers are usually forced to flee their homeland due to poverty, war, terrorism and general inequality where they live and it should be in the interest of everyone to better their lives instead of mainly focusing on the criminalisation of people smugglers and asylum seekers alike. Policies and detention centres are created to increase border protection methods and decrease the illegal arrival of refugees into Australia, with little to no consideration for the refugees themselves or where they’re coming from. Instead of focusing time, energy and money into jailing people smugglers and detaining people from Australia, politicians and everyone alike should focus time into equalising all of the people of the world. If Australia and other countries focused more time on the legal migration of refugees then there would be less people smuggling occurring and legitimate methods could be used to transport people away from terrorism, war and inequality. The detainment of refugees has proven to also be surrounded by much inequality. Australia’s solution to the ‘problem’ of asylum seekers has been to send them offshore, keeping them detained in a facility until better solutions can be devised. Previous Commission reports have noted the prison-like nature of refugee facilities developed by the Australian government in particular, the Christmas Island IDC and have proposed concern, stating that it should not even be used for accommodating asylum seekers. The Commission has reported “particular concerns about some security measures, including high wire fences, walkways enclosed in cage-like structures, CCTV surveillance, metal reinforced officer booths with Perspex security screens, and metal grills on bedroom windows” (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2012). Even Australia’s solution to the problem is surrounded by

The 1951 convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (The Refugees Convention) was designed for the protection of asylum seekers. It identifies their rights to seek asylum whether it be from persecution in regards to race, religion, nationality, or political opinion outside of their

The refugee crisis has been a contentious issue for the past decade as the amount of people seeking refuge in foreign countries is rising exponentially, with many countries turning to off shore detention as a way to deal with this issue (Coffey, Kaplan, Sampson & Tucci, 2010; Crock, Saul & Dastyari; Ljungholm, 2014). As a result of this influx the demand for human rights lawyers has increased, because the indefinite nature of the detention it is seen to be a breach of human rights (Saul, 2012; Evenhuis, 2013; Ljungholm, 2014). It is evident from the literature that long term indefinite detention of children and young adults has a significant adverse effect on their mental health, both long and short term. The two major themes that this literature

Refugees and Asylees are defined as, “Under international law as being outside their home country and having a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group, according to Bridging Refugee Youth & Children Services article, “Refugee 101.” In the United States, refugee and asylees resettlement was reestablished in the 1980’s. So far, 1.8 million people came to live in the US and annually, about 40,000 to 75,000 people are approved as refugee arrivals or asylees. “According to a 2009 report by the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR), 42 million people around the world were uprooted from their homes due to conflict or persecution.” In the moment, “The largest refugee producing countries at present include Afghanistan, Iraq, Somali and Sudan, while Colombia, Iraq, Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo have the largest internally displaced populations.” In article 14, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, “(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution” and ”(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” This right should always be exercised to an extent and the people

It is fair to say that my rationale for selecting this area of research was of course my own interest and learning but in addition, that this may help to add greater depth of understanding, tolerance in an area that is often used to discredit and negatively label asylum seekers and refugees. It also appears from my preliminary searches that there is dearth of information on this subject.

Today, it is nearly impossible for URMs to receive any government papers from EU states and they are often forgotten and left in detention centers for weeks or even months. In addition to prolonged periods of detention, Human Rights Watch reported that in detention centers “children face unsanitary and degrading conditions and abusive treatment, including detention with adults and ill-treatment by police. Under European and international standards, in the exceptional cases that an unaccompanied child is detained for his or her protection, conditions should be governed by the best interest of the child” (HRW, “Why Are You”). These conditions, however, are far from being in “the best interest of the child.” In fact, detention and refugee centers are extremely ineffective in protecting vulnerable children. These children are blatantly disregarded and left defenseless against abuse and sex-trafficking. This completely violates EU laws since children are supposed to be under the State’s protection. EU members can start alleviating the burden URMs by cutting down holding periods and by following the guidelines of international human rights instruments as well as domestic laws. Otherwise, if minors are left in the same inhospitable conditions and circumstances in Europe, are their human rights any more realized than under the oppressive regimes they left

In order for International refugee law to function and satisfactorily benefit the people it has challenged state sovereignty in some aspects. Regardless of the enforcement laws signatory states have been able to keep authority over the flow of refugees individually keeping their territorial supremacy. In my opinion refugee law has not challenged the principle of state sovereignty enough as some people still seem to fall within the cracks and are not afforded protection. States are still refusing to to give a little of their power away in order to protect human rights. This essay is going to be discussing the 1951 convention, internally displaced persons and the concept of non-refoulement in relation to the protection for forced migrants.

The United Nations High Commission on Refugees estimates that almost three million people were categorized as refugees at the end of 2014, which is equivalent to almost three percent of the world’s population1. The 1951 Refugee Convention provides that a refugee is a person, who, “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted...is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or … is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country”.2 There is a mounting pressure for the world, particularly European and Middle Eastern countries, which are being inundated with refugees, to find a solution to the refugee crisis. In this search, the question has arisen of whether a country should prioritize the humanitarian needs