Australian Human Rights Obligations Analysis

The focal issue of this argument is when an Asylum Seeker arrives in Australia without a visa, they are required to stay in detention well beyond the period of time it should take to gather basic information about an asylum claim, health identity or security issues. This can lead to an asylum seeker often being detained for months and sometimes for years. Under the Migration Act (Cth.) 1958 there is no time limit on this detention and only very limited review by the courts is available. The ‘United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty’, rule 11 (b) (UNHCR) considers ‘detention as; confinement within a narrowly bounded or restricted location, where freedom of movement is substantially curtailed, and where the only opportunity

This hinders public access and understanding of their entitled rights by the public. The humanitarian laws on Asylum seekers need to be change with precision and care in order to suit the current situation and protect their rights as it is not respected; in order to uphold Australia’s image as an advanced and democratic nation in this issue. This will give the refugees the rights that they deserve and the “fair go” that embodies our

For many years refugees have been demonized by the country through the spread of fear and misconception. Furthermore, the disgusting treatment of refugees in the detention camps by the Australian Government has been roundly criticised by the international community.

The detention of asylum seekers on offshore islands has becomes central to Australia’s border security program (Dickson, 2015). The offshore detention, processing and resettlement regime branded the ‘Pacific Solution’ was terminated in 2008; it was reconfigured and resurrected in 2013 (Larkin, 2017). Manus Island and Nauru were closed in 2008 by the Australian Labour government, bringing an end to the ‘Pacific Solution,’ the centres were once again used in 2012 to house asylum seekers by the same government that ended the practice years before (Dickson, 2015). The next year, in 2013, the Australian Coalition government made Australia’s asylum policy even sterner, with ‘Operation Sovereign Borders’, which placed all the control of asylum operations in the hands

Human rights violations occur all around the world whether it's the genocide of millions because of beliefs or if it’s the fact that people are left with restrictions that others are not affected by, similar to the segregation that previously existed in the United States . One violation of human rights that occurred in Australia that has caused controversy was the sterilization of disabled women in Australia. This sterilization caused an uproar because of the violation of a woman’s right to produce offspring, regardless of her mental status. This forced sterilization on the mentally disabled women of Australia became a situation in which the UN became involved because of the violation of human rights. Globally, it it considered inhumane to

The resettlement of refugees in Australia is a controversial topic; many people believe that they come here to commit crime, change our culture and steal our jobs. ‘The Happiest Refugee’ has enhanced my belief that refugees should be allowed to live in Australia. I believe that refugees are here to escape war and persecution; they are not criminals, nor do they want to change our culture or steal our jobs. Refugees are generally grateful for their new lives in Australia and they embrace our culture. ‘The Happiest Refugee’ is a source of evidence that supports this.

Asylum seekers who are held in mandatory and indefinite detention for prolonged periods of time

Another technique used in the documentary to challenge the viewers’ assumptions was the use of narration to present facts about the refugee situation. These facts and figures give the viewers a truthful and realistic picture of the situation. Some beliefs that exist in Australian society are that we are taking in too many refugees; they are criminals, they are taking over Australia, using Australian tax payers’ money and changing our culture. However, we are presented with facts and figures that change our assumptions. For example, more than 30 million people have fled their homes with nothing but the clothes they wear, boat smugglers charge up to and over $10, 000 US dollars, 13, 000 refugees are accepted annually only 2,000 of those refugees arrive by boat. Despite what many people think, like Raye who believed refugees in Australia are “handed everything on a gold platter,” life in detention centres is hard. In Villawood Detention Centre, over 9 months, three detainees committed suicide and 18 caused self-harm.

“My hope finished now. I don’t have any hope. I feel I will die in detention.”
Unaccompanied 17 year old, Phosphate Hill Detention Centre, Christmas Island, 4 March 2014. 
Few social justice issues in Australia have attracted as much attention and controversy in recent times as the issue of asylum seekers. An asylum-seeker ‘is an individual who has sought international protection and whose claim for refugee status has not yet been determined’. In contrast, a refugee is an individual whose protection has been deemed necessary by the UNHCR or a State who is a signatory to the Refugee Convention. 
The issues surrounding asylum seeker has divide opinions and evoke strong emotional responses across the community. We are aware that asylum seekers are often vulnerable people, desperately fleeing civil unrest, warfare and persecution from across the world. We know that Australia is a destination of choice for many people seeking to embark on a new life in safety. And we know that there are people who will exploit the vulnerability of asylum seekers by offering them unsafe passage by sea to our shores. 
There were 584 children detained in immigration detention centres on mainland Australia and 305 children on Christmas Island. A further 179 children were detained on Nauru as at 31 March 2014.

Political unrest and local war happens around the world all the time. Many people live in a dangerous situation and suffered from violence. Hence, large amount of asylum seeker undertakes a huge perilous, try to cross the ocean and arrive Australia. To deal with this issue, Australian government enacted mandatory detention policy and offshore processing policy, these policies become highly contentious in the community with many arguments and criticisms. This report will focus on the nature and purpose of these immigration policies and the impact towards the asylum seeker as well as the criticism form international. To propose some advice about how the future policies should be framed.

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’.

This report is directly concerned with the Australian Government’s policies under ‘Operation Sovereign Borders,’ its ‘Regional Resettlement Arrangement’ with Papua New Guinea (PNG), and the ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ with the Republic of Nauru, which remove, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) irregular maritime arrivals to countries where their fundamental reason for seeking asylum – persecution on grounds relating to their sexual orientation and/or gender identity – is sufficient cause for further persecution, and even criminal sanction, in the recipient country. This report reveals that by transferring LGBTI asylum seekers to countries which intend to persecute them on the same grounds for which they originally sought asylum, Australia is breaching its international human rights obligations by directly undermining the principle of non-refoulement .

The issue of asylum seekers recently was reignited, with the dramatic increase in the number of illegal boats arriving in Australia. From the 30th of September 2013, there were a reported 6,403 people in closed detention, this number including 1,078 children. It is not surprising from these high detention rates and poor living standards that between January 2011 and February 2013 that there were 4,313 reported incidents of actual, threatened or attempted serious self-harm in these immigration detention facilities. From 12 deaths that occurred between the 1st of July 2010 and the 20th of June 2013 6 of these have been found by coroners to be suicides (Triggs, 2013). These statistics are incredibly alarming, especially when not much action is being taken to prevent not only mental illness but also the consequences of prolonged mental illness - suicide. The purpose of this report is to analyse and scrutinize the reason why mental health issues for asylum seekers are becoming an issue in Australia, and find out what exactly is being done to combat this ever-growing issue in Australia.

Therefore, the inability of the family to have their detention reviewed by a court violated article 9(4). The Human Rights Committee said that domestic review of the lawfulness of detention ought to include deliberation of Australia’s obligations under the ICCPR. The Human Rights Council found an added breach of article 2(3) (the right to an effective remedy), despite this breach not being affirmed explicitly by “A”. Australia rejected the Human Rights Committee’s interpretation of the Covenant and declined to compensate the “A” family. The Human Rights Council has deemed this response from the State Party unsatisfactory.

From the past, education has always been seen as a crucial aspect of our lives. In 1968, Durkheim stated that ‘society can survive only if there exists among its members a sufficient degree of homogeneity; education perpetuates and reinforces this homogeneity by fixing in the child, from the beginning, the essential similarities that collective life demands.’ Education has become even more indispensable as more instruments start to recognise the right to education. For instance, Article 2 of the First Protocol (A2P1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 28(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This essay will assess the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) in protecting the right to education in England. It is noted that the HRA 1998 provide a relatively limited protection as compared to the rest of the instruments. But looking in light of the proposed reform on HRA 1998, the current protection provided by the HRA 1998 has undeniably secured certain protections toward the children’s educational rights. Firstly, this essay looks into the scope of protections that are provided by the HRA 1998. Secondly, the effectiveness of A2P1. Thirdly, the influence of other conventions with regards to the right to education. Lastly, the essay will conclude by looking at the future reform of the HRA 1998.