Asylum seekers sent to Nauru

15 March 2007

Media Release - For immediate release

Sri Lankan Asylum Seekers held on Christmas Island

National refugee policy group, A Just Australia, is dismayed at today's announcement that all but one of the recently arrived Sri Lankan asylum seekers held on Christmas Island are to be sent to Nauru.

"This group includes one unaccompanied minor. That this Government will ship a lone child off to Nauru to be held indefinitely in conditions that have been found by numerous reports and investigations to be appalling displays an astounding lack of compassion." said National Coordinator, Kate Gauthier

A Just Australia points out that this decision means the inevitable detention of proven refugees. In recent correspondence to the 8 Burmese men still awaiting the opening of their cases after seven months, the Government has restated the policy that anyone processed on Nauru will not be offered resettlement in Australia, even if found to be refugees. This makes it official Government policy that Australia will detain known refugees, and seals the fate of these Sri Lankan asylum seekers.

Minister Kevin Andrews is attempting to justify this move as a deterrent to other asylum seekers, but the facts do not support this claim. "The deterrent factor of offshore processing has been disproven by the arrival of these very asylum seekers the Government now seeks to punish. They have used offshore processing for five years now. If it was ever going to work to deter people it would have done so already." said Ms. Gauthier

A Just Australia also queries the necessity of the new immigration detention centre being built on Christmas Island, currently facing a huge budget blowout. "Before this centre is even finished, it appears the government has flip-flopped on its own bad policy by saying no asylum seekers will be sent there. They have now wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on something that should never have been built in the first place."

For media comment:
Kate Gauthier 0414 876 139

Questions the Media should be asking:
• Why would this policy be put in place when the Designated Unauthorised Arrivals (DUA ) legislation seeking to send asylum seeker boat arrivals arriving on the Australian mainland to Nauru for processing was withdrawn? Is this not a backdoor method of subverting the democratic process?
• What is the estimate of costs for sending these people to Nauru?
• If the Government refuses to process these Sri Lankan asylum seekers on the mainland why not do it on Christmas Island, housing detention facilities already?
• Why are the two men carrying documents about their refugee status still being held offshore?
• Why is an unaccompanied child still being held offshore?
• Does the treatment of these asylum seekers reflect the same Australian values by which the Prime Minister wishes others to live ?
Background Information
As you are probably aware, there are 83 Sri Lankan asylum seekers currently being held on Christmas Island, awaiting a decision from the Australian Government about whether their refugee protection claims will be processed by Australia, and whether that will occur on mainland Australia, Christmas Island or Nauru.

A Just Australia calls upon the Australian Government to respect the Australian values and the international agreements that would be breached if these people are denied access to the full range of Australia's refugee determination system, including access to the Refugee Review Tribunal and judicial review.

A breach of Australian values
There has been a lot said about 'Australian values' by the Prime Minister. We challenge Mr Howard and the Immigration Minister to explain how denying these people access to a fair determination of their protection needs supports the values by which they want Australians to live, such as 'a fair go' or 'care and compassion.' This situation is once again a test of whether the Government is prepared to practice what it preaches.

Designated Unauthorised Arrivals bill was not enacted
In 2006, in response to the arrival of a boat of West Papuan asylum seekers the Government introduced a bill that would result in all boat arrival asylum seekers being sent to Nauru, regardless of where they landed in Australia. This bill was withdrawn in response to community outrage and the possibility of politicians crossing the floor to vote against this bill. The proposal to send the recently arrived Sri Lankan asylum seekers from Christmas Island to Nauru seeks to introduce this policy without even the benefit of a vote.

The Australian Government should respect the wishes of the Australian public who have clearly rejected this policy.

Costs of Nauru
Transferring and detaining the 83 Sri Lankan asylum seekers on Nauru will cost at least $60 million The transfer of just eight Burmese asylum seekers from Christmas Island in 2006 to Nauru cost $225,000. These 83 people plus new staff and resources will need multiple jet flights. The cost may approach a million dollars. Federal Government estimates show that the Pacific Solution has cost around $198,000 per detainee The average cost of detaining a person at Baxter Immigration Detention Centre on the mainland is $38,000 per annum.

Christmas Island Centre
The detention centre on Christmas Island itself has come under recent scrutiny. It is designed to hold up to 800 people and has cost nearly $400 million to build. If the Sri Lankan asylum seekers are sent to Nauru, it means the government will have wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on a policy that was abandoned before the facility was even completed.

Terrible conditions on Nauru
All studies of Nauru as well as reports of visiting physicians, psychologists, lawyers and former detainees indicate that detention conditions on Nauru are sub-standard. Lack of access to appropriate welfare, legal and medical services are also a cause for concern, especially when far better services could be provided to asylum-seekers on the mainland.

No review of decisions
The Immigration department's own figures show that for arrivals from some countries, over 90 per cent of asylum claims refused by the Department of Immigration at first instance are overturned by the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) People held on Nauru do not have the safety net of the RRT, leading to the inevitable return of refugees to danger.

Resettlement options
Australia will accept no obligations towards any refugees other than to see whether a 'third' country will take them. In the previous use of the Pacific Solution, of the 1063 refugees eventually resettled only 46 (4.3%) were accepted into countries other than Australia and New Zealand. There is genuine concern that other countries are unlikely to accept any resettlements from the Pacific Solution Mark II .This will lead to indefinite detention while refugees wait for a place to call home.

Australia has a responsibility to protect refugees
As a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention, it is Australia's responsibility to process the claims of asylum seekers who land anywhere in our territory, and to offer protection to those who need it. Australia denies protection to people processed on Nauru, claiming that no asylum seekers will be settled in Australia from Nauru. Australia must not shift our human rights obligations onto our neighbours. As such, Australia should not send the recently arrived Sri Lankan asylum seekers to Nauru, but should process them on Australian soil under Australian law.

Sri Lanka too dangerous for return
Sri Lanka is currently in a state of civil war and the ceasefire between the Government and the Tamil Tigers has broken down. A panel of international jurists has said anti-terrorism laws in Sri Lanka have led to widespread and systematic rights abuses, including extra-judicial killings and torture. Clearly the recently arrived asylum seekers have a right to protection from return to these conditions.