Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Goodbye job applications, hello dream career
Seize control of your career and design the future you deserve with LW career

Lawyers question legality of PNG asylum plan

Lawyers have described Rudd’s plan to send boat arrivals to Papua New Guinea as technically legal, so far, but against the intent of the UN Refugee Convention.

user iconStephanie Quine 25 July 2013 SME Law
Lawyers question legality of PNG asylum plan
expand image

Lawyers have described Rudd’s plan to send boat arrivals to Papua New Guinea (PNG) as technically legal, so far, but against the intent of the UN Refugee Convention.

Kerry Murphy, an immigration law specialist at D'Ambra Murphy Lawyers in Sydney, said any legal challenge to the plan is not going to work for the same reasons as the M70 Case did.

“They changed the Act last year to make sure that wouldn’t happen again,” said Murphy.

The Government amended the Migration Act after it was used to defeat its Malaysian Solution in the High Court. The legal requirements for "relevant human rights standards" and "effective procedures for assessing [boat arrivals’] need for protection" in countries to which Australia sends them were removed and replaced with broad ministerial discretionary powers.

The "only condition" for the immigration minister to approve the transfer of asylum seekers to another country now is that doing so is in Australia's "national interest".

“The minister thinks it’s in the national interest to designate [PNG] to be a regional processing country, so he’s able to do it,” said Murphy.

The Act requires, however, that the minister has regard to whether or not the designated country has given assurances that transferred asylum seekers will not be subject to refoulement.

The President of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (ALHR), John Southalan (pictured below), questioned whether Australia has such assurances from PNG.

 “The resettlement arrangement says these people will go to PNG for processing and resettlement, either in PNG or any other participating state, which isn’t defined, so it’s not entirely clear,” said Southalan.

“[That] could be used to support a legal challenge [because] the Government needs assurances that the country will not expel or return a person to somewhere where they’ll be threatened on account of race, religion, etc...”

The amended Migration Act also requires PNG to make an assessment, or permit an assessment to be made, of whether transferred asylum seekers are refugees under the Refugee Convention.

Murphy said that, realistically, PNG has no domestic mechanism to deal with this.

“They’ve got no administrative law system set up to run it, so Australia will be paying the bills to set all that up, train the people to do it, and run it,” he said, adding that perhaps more problematic than mounting a legal challenge to the Rudd Government plan, is actually finding a client able to access a lawyer and give instructions.

Danger in PNG

The Federal Government’s smart traveller website urges a “high degree of caution in PNG because of high levels of serious crime” and cites an “increase in reported incidents of sexual assault, including gang rape, and foreigners have been targeted”. 

Human rights activists argue that the Government has given greater weight to the issue of people smugglers and deaths at sea, at the expense of broader human rights and refugee protection.

“The irony is that we’re saying ‘the deterrent is PNG’ so we’re in inadvertently saying PNG is such a horrible place that people won’t want to got there; they’d rather stay in limbo in Indonesia,” said Murphy.

PNG criminalises homosexuality, with the maximum penalty of imprisonment for up to 14 years.

Murphy said that the three common cases among Iranian refugees are political beliefs, homosexuality, and conversion to Christianity.

“There will be a proportion of Iranians that may well make that claim to being [persecuted for being homosexual] and now be seriously worried about whether they should say that sort of thing in PNG,” said Murphy.

If boat arrivals suffer human rights violations in a situation that Australia is funding, Southalan said Australia could be in breach of its international obligations under various conventions.

“PNG is not a party to the Convention Against Torture, the Protocol Against the Death Penalty, or Protocol on Human Trafficking,” he said, adding that if someone was fleeing persecution in PNG and Australia sent them back “that would be a clear breach”.

Australia has promised to “provide support, through a service provider, to any refugees who are resettled in PNG”, but Southalan warned this could lead to problems among two different refugee groups in the country: “one with more facilities and rights than the other”

“The Refugee Convention is about giving the broadest degree of protection and rights to asylum seekers and implementing that in good faith,” he said, adding that Australia’s sub-contracting its responsibility to refugees to a local developing nation, tied up with the idea of foreign aid, was shameful.

Comments (3)
  • Avatar
    <p>not one single comment on this article and why is that?<br>Answer..<br>Because it's full of F'ing lawyers who censor any comment that is not to their liking.<br>My comment posted a few days back has been censored and obviously all other comments have been censored as well..<br>That is why there are ZERO coments, nada nothing zilch..<br>People like Murphy and co are nothing more than ignorant arrogant examples of what is wrong with the world.<br>They seek to defend all that is crap, inflame any discussion why biased scare mongering rubbish and all just to fatten their wallets..<br>They are a disgrace to humanity..<br>hang your collective heads in shame..<br>so stick your article up where the sun does not shine..<br>you are all afraid of anyone who shows you lot up for what you are..<br>scared little boys..</p>
    0
  • Avatar
    <p>There are no comments on this article because they have all been censored.<br>Typical of lawyers, they cannot handle anyone with a different point of view.</p>
    0
  • Avatar
    <p>Far too many over zealous advocates, bleeding hearts, do-gooders and ignorant people in Australia,(whilst well intentioned I'm sure), can't see past their collective noses who in clamouring for the protection of refugees, are not able to discern the difference between legal refugees and illegal refugees and economic imigrants. (Real refugees are folk fleeing in fear of their lives), But/and more to the point a lot of these advocates for refugees are supposedly learned folk, ie university academics, lawyers and such like. Such people have in fact compounded the situation in an adverse manner by encouraging people smugglers to send more boats over. More boats will lead to more drownings. Ok so folk are desperate to leave their stuffed up countries, fair enough, want a better life, ok, but Australia has a front door, and these boats represent attempts by foolish refugees and cashed up economic migrants to use the back door and are nothing more than a trade in human suffering by people smugglers who promise them safe passage but instead dupe them with a leaky unseaworthy boat. How many more times are such "advocates" going to undermine attempts to stem the flow of boats. Back door entries quite rightly do not deserve the chance to re-settle in Australia. They should wait in a camp where ever and wait their turn to be flown out/transported to a safe country, which may be Australia, not queue jump, because in queue jumping they rightly must be sent to the back of the queue. They seek to steal a place from refugees waiting in line to use the front door.<br>So therefore Prime Minister Rudds slaming shut this death trap of a back door by boats is the most sensible humanitarian solution put forward in the last 10 yrs.<br>These bleeding hearts along with the rest of the coalition seek to send a message to the people smugglers, hang on, we will attempt to overthrow this new sensible policy and open up the back door again for all you people smugglers to send more boats over..Tony Abbot, Scott Morrison, and other similar politicians and advocates like David Manne, John Southalan to name but a few, should just hang their heads in shame. History will surely judge such advocates, lawyers and such like ploiticians as the ones who truly had the blood on their hands. Makes an honest person cringe. Where has their common sense gone, or is it a modern fact that there is no more common sense in the world. That we now live in a world devoid of common sense?</p><p>Australia is happy to take refugees, And may raise the total of front door entries to 27000 from 20000, but through the front door.. Through legal and safe passage..</p><p>What is so hard for the bleeding hearts to understand..</p><p>PT Barnum said it all when he stated that there is one born every minute.</p><p>He was/is so right, for some folk real thought does not exist.</p>
    0
Avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!