What Are Asylum Seekers In Australia

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

Every year, thousands of people seek refuge in Australia after being forced to flee their homes. Under the UN 1951 Refugee convention, countries are obliged to protect refugees and basic human rights must be upheld. However, Australia is violating these laws. As of August 2013, a report by the Australian Human Rights

Sadly, that's the harsh reality for many asylum seekers, seeking refuge in Australia as they are arbitrarily detained. Good morning or afternoon. It has been a profound honour to be invited to address you about the eloquently breach of basic human rights asylum seeker face while being detained in our shores. Mandatory detention should be abolished as it causes indiscriminate health risk. Instead, the Australia government should allow asylum seekers to settle into the community. We should be viewing asylum seekers as a humanitarian issue instead of a political one.

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.

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

Australia has a legal obligation towards Asylum Seekers and Refugees as it is a signatory to the UN Human Rights and Refugee Conventions. Furthermore, Australia has a moral obligation based on its membership of the world community.

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).

200 bare back lashes, publicly shaming you in front of your whole community. A minimum of 6 months imprisonment. Post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental illnesses left untreated. This is the punishment for a woman in Syria who has been gang raped by 7 men. (pause) In 2011, the Syrian civil war broke out, affecting the whole population. Displacement, house arrest and kidnapping, are just some of the things civilians experience. These innocent victims are petrified to live in their own homes, and are brave enough to flee and strive to seek asylum in Australia. The issue concerning asylum seekers in Australia has been prevalent for more than 15 years now. However, rather then the debate of “letting them in”, it is now an issue of the safety and mistreatment of these refugees.

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).

This report examines that the impacts of immigration detention and violating of human rights with the mental health care of asylum seekers. In the recent years, increased number of illegal immigrants arriving by boat in Australia. This raises key issues concerning about mental health of asylum-seekers, especially for detained immigrants. Research shows that Australia currently own around 13,000 refugees per annum, under the Refugee Convention (1951), Australia has obligation to evaluate refugee claims, but it processes only 2.2% of them made to 44 industrialised countries (p.315).

Devastated by war and violence, a mother listens to the desperate cries of her young one’s yearning for the feel of solid land underneath their feet. Imagine living in a world where you are forced to leave your country and seek refuge in another, all because of a war that you did not start, yet are forced to endure the consequences of. A world where mothers, daughters, fathers and sons have no choice other than to travel across a dangerous ocean where they are at risk of being raped by pirates or drowning in endless sea of blue, never to be seen again. This world is soon to arrive on Australia’s door step. This beautiful country that we call home prides itself on being a safe haven for asylum seekers.

The legislation of prohibiting workers from disclosing inhumane conditions breaches numerous agreements Australia has legally been binded to. The UN have explicitly stated how the Australian Government in the past and present, have been violating human rights and breaching Article 31 of the Refugee Convention where it states that; ‘Refugees will be exempted if they are coming directly from a country of persecution from being punished on account of their illegal entry or presence, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry

Asylum seekers are the world's number one problem and debate going on right now in most countries, Australia right now does not allow most asylum seekers in and turns them away bringing up one of the bigger questions in our time yet are asylum seekers people as well? Should we let them in? And do they pose a threat to Australia's economy? I think we should let them in

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.