Essay On Refuge Seekers

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 Coalition government declared that there was a ‘national emergency’ on Australia’s borders, in turn demanding a direct response to this ‘issue’ through a disciplined, focused and targeted military operation (Dickson, 2015). Thus, ‘Operation Sovereign Borders’ emerged with its primary objective being ‘to stop the boats’ (Dickson. 2015). This new policy involved the military interception of ‘unauthorized maritime arrivals,’ thus sending the individuals found on the boats directly to Manus Island and Nauru (Fraenkel, 2016). From the inauguration of this revamped policy, no matter where an asylum seeker arrived from by boat, they were subject to transfer to either Manus Island or Nauru (Grewcock, 2014). The purpose of this policy was to ensure the removal of all boat arrivals attempting to breach Australia and in turn any possibility of resettlement for the asylum seekers in the nation (Grewcock, 2014). Thus, those accepted as genuine refugees would be permanently resettled in either Papua New Guinea, or Nauru, although the government of Nauru held that it would not be granting refugees

Almost all children in Australian detention centres either travelled to Australia by boat without a visa or were born in detention. The number of people arriving by boat rose substantially from

In May 2013, the Government made some extension in policy to apply to asylum seekers who arrive by boat anywhere in Australia. Under this system, Asylum seekers who have arrived by boat must be transferred to the third country. Additionally, if these people transferred to third country then their claims of protection will be processed under this country’s law. Reciprocally, if asylum seekers who arrive by boat are allowed by the minister to remain in Australia, then their claims will be processes under Australian law. However, as of June 2013, Australian Government has not yet started processing any claims by asylum seekers, who arrived after 13 August, 2013. This was the step taken by former government maybe under the pressure of its own people who are Australians. As far as Australians are concerned, it is true that Australians are racist and they won’t people of other countries to come and live in their country. Racism can be seen in clubs and pubs where those Australian see other people with angrily and heatedly. Even though, Racism factor is present in Australia; but still it is a beautiful and safe country. Meanwhile, as far as the Australians views are concerned in regarding to asylum seekers who arrive on boats or any other way to

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.

During 2012-13 Australia’s Refugee and Humanitarian program increased from 13,750 to 20,000 places divided between offshore resettlement and onshore protection. It resulted in 87% rise in the number of offshore resettlement visas granted. The alternatives include indefinite mandatory detention and mandatory detention. Asylum seekers who arrive without prior valid visas usually have to go through mandatory detention. They usually stay in detention for an average of 450 days. Community placement are another alternative. Many asylum seekers from immigration detentions centers are released are placed on bridging visas so they can live in community. Although

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

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 mandatory detention policy in Australia is a legal requirement to detain non-citizens without a valid visa. It was first introduced in 1992 by the Australian Labour Party led by Paul Keating, as a response to the number of boat arrivals seeking asylum in Australia from the aftermath of the Vietnam War. In 1976 to 1981, the first wave of 2000 asylum seekers landed in Australia, where they were sympathetically allowed entrance, followed by a quick grant of a refugee visa status as they were assumed to be ‘genuine refugees’. However, continuous boats arrived been 1989 and 1994 which caused concern within the Australian public as there were issues of increased unemployment (Phillips, 2000).

Different Australian government officials all have contrasting views towards asylum seekers. However, the Turnbull government is set to disobey the Australian people’s wants, and keep the asylum seekers away.

Ask yourself this, if we were on a plane and it broke down with everyone being stuck on an island. Would the government not try to find us? To save our lives and bring us back to a better place where there is food, shelter and an overall better living environment. Then why not look for asylums seekers out there? An asylum's seekers life here in Australia is another life saved from war, conflict and other disasters. Asylum seekers should be able to come into Australia through boat and by any means necessary as something that is an act of humanity and not an act of the law, rules and regulations. Because they don’t have time to wait around and be saved by someone. We do not get to decide whether or not their life can be here but we do get a say about it! So let's all make a difference. The main reasons for me bearing this opinion is one of three. For one, Asylum seekers should be able to enter Australia on a boat because they are trying to get away from war and conflict,

Australia has arguably the most restrictive immigration control in the world and has very tough policies in place for asylum seekers who arrive by boat. Under Australia 's system of mandatory detention, all non-citizens who are in Australia without a valid visa must be detained, including children. In 2012, offshore processing of asylum seekers commenced and detention centres in Nauru and Manus Island (Papua New Guinea) were established. This new system enforced policies that transferred asylum seekers who arrive by boat without a valid visa to a third country. Once the processing of asylum seekers was completed, those found to be genuine refugees will be resettled in Papua New Guinea or Cambodia, not Australia. The Abbott Government stated that no immigrant who arrives in Australia by boat will be grated a visa, no matter the legitimacy of their claim. In April 2016, the Manus Island detention centre was closed after the Supreme Court of Papua New Guinea found it to be illegal. Current immigration Peter Dutton has made it clear that asylum seekers on Manus Island are the responsibility of Papua New Guinea and would not come to Australia. As well as the hundreds of immigrants in offshore detention centres, there are hundreds more in community detention in Australia. There are currently over 26,800 visa applications from those who are awaiting the outcome of their refugee application whilst living on a bridging visa in Australia.

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.