College

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

College is an idea that many people talk about, but is college really meant for everyone?

Despite being granted a visa to enter Australia as a refugee visa (visa subclass 200) refugees must then satisfy other numerous criteria even more challenging. An example of this is apart from meeting national security requirements and health screening the minister of Australian immigration considers applicants must have a "compelling reason for giving special consideration to granting the visa”. Their connection with Australia, the capacity of the Australian community and the degree of severity of persecution they are faced with

Asylum seekers or refugees have fled their countries’ due to volatile circumstances such as war, or fear of prosecution. Upon arrival in Australia they are moved to detention centres. Detention centres hold people who have come without a visa, any non-national and all unauthorised boat arrivals (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2014). These centres hold refugees for indefinite periods and in poor conditions. They are used as a spectacle to represent illegality and a threat to Australian society (Marfleet, 2007, p672).

This topic of this essay will be about Asylum seekers in Australia. Detention centres are meant to be a safe place, while Australian officials try find documents and I.D. However, 27 humane, innocent citizens have died in these so called “safe” detention centres. Yet the Government has done zilch to improve the status and condition of the Asylum Seekers and Detention Centres. This is why Australia must allow Asylum Seekers to enter the Australian community. If the government allowed Asylum Seekers to enter the community, then their rights will improve immensely, they will be educated while in situated Australia, and finally the government will be able to reduce funding for detention centres.

The prominence in relation to Asylum Seekers and Refugees has become a contemporary issue within Australian society and has amounted vast controversy in the media. A Refugee can be defined as a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster as found in the 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees, in which Australia is a signatory to. Every refugee has or will be an asylum seeker. An Asylum Seeker is a person who has left their home country as a political refugee seeking asylum in another but has not had their claim assessed. Asylum seekers have experienced serious breaches of their rights, religious freedom and justice to reach safety. If asylum seekers are found to be

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.

Seeking asylum in Australia is not illegal, it is a basic human right (Human Rights, 2014).

Australian detention centres have been known to violate the United Nations Human Rights Committee’s (UNHRC) human rights obligations, which has resulted in detrimental repercussions for the refugees and asylum seekers accommodated there. With respect to the UNHRC human rights obligations, individuals that are detained must be respected of their humanity and dignity (Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), 2013, pp.7). In December 2012, however, the UNHRC had uncovered overly strict and unsatisfactory living circumstances, for instance overcrowding, which had been known to promote depression and alternate mental illnesses among asylum seekers and refugees (AHRC, 2013, pp.17). Similarly, Burnside (2014) stated that refugees were refused to

In the reality, asylum seekers who come across the seas by boat are not welcomed by Australian government. However, in the Advance Australia Fair, it says: “For those who've come across the seas we've boundless plains to share.” Locking up the asylum seekers who come across the seas to escape from persecution in the detain centres is absolutely not the way people share their “boundless plains”. Also the detain centres have a poor hygiene conditions (Greene & Sveen, 2014) and may have frequent raping and beating (Whyte & Gordon, 2014). Moreover, the new Border Force Act that has already assented recently in May (Parliament of Australia, 2015) will probably imprison the staffs in detain centres who tell the public the real situation inside the detain centres up to 2 years. This act will “effectively turns the Department of Immigration into a secret security organization with police powers” (Barns & Newhouse, 2015). Asylum seekers who come over the seas from India, Indonesia or some other countries to find a new home in Australia will not only not being welcomed as what Advance Australia Fair’s says, but also suffer from life threatening conditions in the detain

Recently, concerns have been raised by political figures and the people of Australia regarding the ‘abysmal treatment’ of asylum seekers (Claire Mallinson, 2015). The violations of their human rights in regards to the conditions they are forced to live in inside detention centers show that these centres do not operate within the humanitarian requirements Australia has agreed to abide by. The current process that handles the arrival and subsequent treatment of asylum seekers does not allow the migratory system to properly address the complications that the present circumstances impose. The Universal Declaration Human Rights (1948) (UDHR) and the United Nations 1951 Refugee Convention were signed by Australia to recognize its support of these

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

In the video “Professor Jane McAdam-Australian Refugee Policies”, Jane McAdam, the Scientia Professor of Law and Director of the Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at the University of New South Wales, explains how Australia has implemented different refugee policies. There are Temporary and Permanent Protection Visas, and they vary greatly (McAdam 1:20-1:25). Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs) have a shorter duration, most three years, and the holder of the visa is assessed every few years, causing overwhelming stress of possibly being deported from Australia (McAdam 1:26-1:53).

International law under the 1951 Refugee Convention, permits the right to seek asylum and allocates a responsibility to provide protection for those who lie under the definition of refugee. Since then policies have been modified and used to suit the interests of the government. In particular, the Border Protection Legislation Amendment Act 1999. Authorised the removal of undocumented ships in Australian territory and proclaimed that anyone aboard the ship can be forcibly returned and denied application of asylum. Other legislation, such as the Migration Legislation Amendment Act 1999 makes it illegal for a person to carry people who are not citizens without valid documentation. These policies allow the government to portray itself as strong on border protection and terrorism. This plays well to its core constituencies but is rightly lambasted by human rights organisations and civil liberty groups. Refugees are undocumented people fleeing from their country of origin, so there isn’t a variety of travel options to escape to safety. The policy disclaiming that ‘everyone who lands by boat doesn’t get to stay’ is ignorant to the concept of why people are forced to leave. It’s not a choice to be removed from your country, it's a matter of survival and safety. The core principle of the Refugee convention is that people are not forced to return to a country where they face the threat of persecution or danger.

Kyle Laffin is seen ias a typical mid 20’s American. He attended college to pursue a degree in accounting and financial freedom, but this came at a cost which he didn’t imagine. He took out a loan with his father as a cosigner for a little over $100,000. Even though he got an accounting job directly out of college, he is now stuck paying back a monthly loan payment of $1,200, when he only makes $3,333 a month before taxes. This has forced his father to make payments since he cosigned the loan. His father began working two jobs and was forced to take money out of his retirement account just to be able to make those excruciating monthly payments (Woodruff).