Amnesty International is calling it a ‘landmark decision.’
Hundreds of refugees are sitting in limbo on Christmas Island after an Australian High Court decision last Wednesday dealt a mortal blow to Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s deal with Malaysia to exchange refugees.
Australia had arranged to take in 4,000 refugees from Malaysia over a four year period while 800 refugees who had landed illegally in Australia would have gone to Malaysia.
The 800 refugees were to have their claims processed in Malaysia under the auspices of the United Nations.
Shock waves went through the Australian government after the High Court ruled that that “Malaysia is not a party to the Refugees Convention or its protocol,” and that the refugees could not be sent to a country that could not legally guarantee their safety.
“We very much welcome this decision to scrap the Malaysian deal,” says Amnesty International (N.Z) Chief Executive, Patrick Holmes.
“Amnesty has consistently warned the Australian Government that Malaysia was a dangerous place for asylum seekers,” he said.
“Australia should never have contemplated outsourcing Australia’s refugee protection obligations to a country which regularly canes, detains and abuses asylum seekers.”
He said children travelling alone would have been especially at risk if moved to Malaysia.
Amnesty says that all refugees, whether heading to Australia or New Zealand, should be treated equally whether they arrive in boat or plane.
“We saw recently with the issue of potential asylum seekers from Sri Lanka that is sends our own government into something of a panic,” said Mr Holmes referring to Prime Minister John Key’s “not welcome here” response.
Returning asylum seekers out to sea in a boat that might sink is not the solution, said Mr Holmes.
Human Rights Activist, Maire Leadbeater says that Australia and New Zealand have both signed the United Nations Refugee Convention. If refugees are fleeing in desperation, are genuinely afraid of being persecuted and their lives are at risk, they have the right to be granted asylum.
“Both Australia and New Zealand are guilty of trying to sidestep those fundamental obligations—New Zealand by putting in place procedures so that it is very difficult for anyone to arrive here,” she says.
Refugees are checked before being allowed to board a plane while Australia wants to process asylum seekers offshore.
“I don’t think that is in the spirit of the convention ... and I don’t think there is any justification for doing that,” she says.
People become asylum seekers because of war, not out of choice, she points out.
“Tamils from Sri Lanka were fleeing from an absolutely horrendous conflict in 2009 when thousands of them were slaughtered ... they had no choice but to flee to save their lives.
“They ended up in temporary and unstable situations in South East Asia and then a people smuggler and a man in a leaky boat...,” said Ms Leadbeater.
“You need to put yourself in the shoes of the people who are fleeing and that is very hard for us to do because we live in a very safe kind of a country.”
Richard Towle, UNHCR Regional Representative said in an interview with ABC, “If people feel safer where they are, there’s no need for them to put their lives and resources into the hands of these unscrupulous people smugglers.”
“So the key for us is a real, concerted effort to improve protection in south-east Asia, not find more and creative ways of moving people from Australia into the Pacific under Australia’s own responsibilities.”
