MEDIA RELEASE

AUSTRALIA FAILS THE MANDATORY DETENTION TEST

Dr Andreas Schloenhardt

Australia’s globally notorious mandatory detention policy for unauthorised entrants was more extreme than that of any other Asia Pacific nation, a world-respected human rights and refugee law specialist has told the third Charles Darwin Symposium.

The practice of placing all unauthorised arrivals in immigration detention centres, and the conditions in these centres in particular, had brought severe domestic and international criticism for Australia, Dr Andreas Schloenhardt told participants.

Dr Andreas Schloenhardt is an Adelaide University Law School lecturer in Law of Crime and Transnational Crime and Terrorism, and is a member of the Council for Security Cooperation in Asia Pacific (CSCAP) Working Group on Transnational Crime.

Dr Schloenhardt said that after 14 years of operation, Australia’s mandatory detention policy had failed in its principal objective to reduce the number of unauthorised arrivals seeking asylum in this country.

“In combination with very severe restrictions placed on the rights and facilities granted to detainees, as well as recent attempts to turn around asylum seekers prior to them landing in Australia, the Government has placed its main effort on preventing the arrival of asylum seekers,” he said.

“In contrast, most countries in the region that detain unauthorised entrants do so to facilitate their speedy return and prevent them from disappearing in the wider community. Other Western destinations have tried to prevent abuse of their immigration asylum systems without denying access to those needing protection.

“The experience of Western Europe and Scandinavian nations which manage a far greater number of asylum seekers than Australia, has shown that releasing these people into the community, subject to residency and reporting obligations or guarantor requirements, is not only a more humane and sensitive way to deal with people who have fled traumatic situations. It is also a far less expensive way to respond to growing numbers of asylum seekers.

“The concern over living conditions, human rights issues, long-term effects and costs of mandatory detention outweigh any benefit that the policy may entail for national security and public order.

“Rather than detaining unlawful arrivals, governments should further explore opportunities to release them into the community, provide them with basic food, accommodation, education and health care and introduce a reporting system to monitor their movements and ensure they do not disappear or relocate without authorisation.

“Recent Australian Government trials to release women and children from the Woomera detention centre should be expanded and ultimately result in the mandatory detention regime being abolished.

“Detention of unauthorised arrivals should be limited to suspected criminals who pose a threat to political stability and national security, or persons whose visa applications have been rejected and who are now expecting removal. “

Dr Schloenhardt said the removal of illegal immigrants from host countries was one of the principal human rights concerns associated with migrant smuggling.

In instances where asylum claims have not been appropriately assessed, there was great danger that genuine refugees could face persecution, discrimination or other forms of human rights violations on returning home. Such threats contravened obligations under international refugee law and other international human rights instruments.

“It is the duty of every government to create awareness of the true nature, causes and consequences of international migration and the situation of those who have fled from war, persecution, starvation, environmental degradation, over population, poverty and unemployment,” he said.

“At the very beginning of any anti-migrant smuggling policy must be a clear analysis of the problem and issues associated with it. The phenomenon needs to be explained to all levels of government and the wider public to ensure that migrant smuggling is property understood and that migrants are treated fairly.”