tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/nauru-detention-centre-55761/articlesNauru detention centre – The Conversation2024-02-21T04:06:34Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2239572024-02-21T04:06:34Z2024-02-21T04:06:34ZBy boat or by plane? If you’re seeking asylum in Australia, the outcome is similarly bleak<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/576913/original/file-20240221-18-tl88st.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=18%2C0%2C4071%2C2299&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/refugees-boat-floating-on-sea-341539700">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last week, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-18/asylum-seekers-moved-to-nauru-mid-political-row/103481494">39 foreign nationals</a> arrived in a remote part of Western Australia by boat. This revived dormant debates about border security.</p>
<p>People without visas come to Australia by air and sea, though we only ever seem to hear about the latter. Unlike unauthorised air arrivals, unauthorised maritime arrivals (people without visas that arrive by boat without permission) are given high media visibility. This feeds a narrative that the country has lost control of its borders, which in turn creates a political problem for the government of the day. </p>
<p>But behind the headlines, what actually happens when people arrive in Australia without permission, whether by boat or by plane?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/boat-arrivals-sent-to-nauru-and-sovereign-borders-commander-warns-against-politicising-the-issue-223822">Boat arrivals sent to Nauru, and Sovereign Borders commander warns against politicising the issue</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What is Australia obligated to do?</h2>
<p>Anyone who’s not an Australian citizen is required to have authorisation in the form of a visa to enter and remain in the country. </p>
<p>What Australia can do to deal with unauthorised arrivals is limited by its international treaty obligations. The United Nations Refugee <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/au/about-unhcr/who-we-are/1951-refugee-convention">Convention</a> and <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/protocol-relating-status-refugees">Protocol</a> oblige Australia to refrain from sending “refugees” (as defined in those treaties) to places where they will face a real chance of persecution. </p>
<p>Under other treaties to which it is a party, Australia is also obliged to refrain from sending anyone, not just refugees, to places where they will face a real risk of certain serious human rights violations. </p>
<p>These treaty obligations are referred to as “non-refoulement” or protection obligations. People who claim the benefit of such protection obligations are called asylum seekers.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1759045943268159543"}"></div></p>
<h2>What happens to asylum seekers when they arrive?</h2>
<p>The processes for people arriving by boat or plane have similarities, but are slightly different.</p>
<p>Australian policy is for unauthorised air arrivals to be given a screening interview to ascertain whether they could be entitled to Australia’s protection under international law. If not, they are returned to their most recent country of departure. Those who are found to have a possible case are given access to the protection visa application process. </p>
<p>The protection visa is Australia’s main domestic mechanism for implementing its international protection obligations. People who initially entered Australia on a valid visa can also apply for a protection visa. Most applicants fall into this group. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/who-counts-as-a-refugee-four-questions-to-understand-current-migration-debates-219735">Who counts as a refugee? Four questions to understand current migration debates</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Australia imposes penalties on airlines that bring non-citizens without valid visas here. It also posts its officials at overseas airports to help airlines identify people without visas so they can be refused boarding. As a result, there are <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/foi/files/2022/fa-220600105-document-released-part-3.PDF">very few</a> unauthorised air arrivals to Australia.</p>
<p>Like people who come by plane, unauthorised maritime arrivals go through a screening process. </p>
<p>Those who are deemed not to be asylum seekers are returned to their most recent country of departure. This is usually, but not always, Indonesia. </p>
<p>Unless the responsible minister grants an exemption, unauthorised maritime arrivals who are found to have a possible asylum claim must be transferred to a regional processing country to have their asylum claims determined there. </p>
<h2>How has regional processing worked?</h2>
<p>Regional processing has a complicated history.</p>
<p>In late 2001, the Coalition government under John Howard entered arrangements with Nauru and Papua New Guinea (PNG) to take unauthorised maritime arrivals to those countries to process their asylum claims. Those arrangements were ended by Labor shortly after it won government in November 2007. </p>
<p>However, a resurgence of unauthorised maritime arrivals led the Gillard Labor government to enter a new set of arrangements with Nauru and PNG in late 2012. These allowed Australia to transfer unauthorised maritime arrivals to processing centres in those countries to have their asylum claims considered by their governments. </p>
<p>The 2012 arrangements left open the possibility that transferees who were found to be refugees might be resettled in Australia. However, when boats kept arriving, the Rudd Labor government decided to get even tougher. In 2013, it <a href="https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20130730234007/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/79983/20130731-0937/www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-joint-press-conference-2.html">announced</a> future unauthorised maritime arrivals would never be resettled in Australia.</p>
<p>After its election in September 2013, the Coalition government implemented Operation Sovereign Borders, which has been continued by the current Labor government. Many activities come under the Operation Sovereign Borders banner, including the interception of unauthorised maritime arrivals at sea by the Australian navy. Regional processing is now also characterised as being part of the program.</p>
<p>The regional processing arrangement with PNG <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220105030919/https:/minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/KarenAndrews/Pages/finalisation-of-the-regional-resettlement-arrangement.aspx">ceased</a> at the end of 2021. As of November 16 2023, there were still <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/operation-sovereign-borders-offshore-detention-statistics/2/">64 transferees</a> remaining in PNG. However, the Australian government’s position is that responsibility for these people lies entirely with PNG and not with Australia.</p>
<p>Nauru is still a <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2023L00093">regional processing country</a> but under a new agreement. At the time it was signed in late 2021, there hadn’t been any transfers for years. However, it was <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20211218062006/https:/www.dfat.gov.au/geo/nauru/memorandum-understanding-between-republic-nauru-and-australia-enduring-regional-processing-capability-republic-nauru">considered important</a> to maintain an “enduring regional processing capacity” on Nauru as a deterrent to people smugglers. </p>
<p>As previously, the Nauruan government is responsible for processing the asylum claims of transferees and managing them until they depart Nauru or are permanently settled there. However, Australia has contracted and is <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/foi/files/2023/fa-221201134-document-released.PDF">paying</a> the processing centre’s service providers.</p>
<p>On June 25 2023, it was reported there were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/25/last-refugee-on-nauru-evacuated-as-australian-government-says-offshore-processing-policy-remains">no transferees</a> remaining in Nauru. This did not mean that a durable solution had been found for everyone who had been transferred to Nauru up until that time. While some people had been resettled in third countries, others had simply been brought to Australia with the legal status of “transitory persons”. This status prevents them from applying for a visa to remain in Australia unless granted ministerial permission to do so. </p>
<p>Australia’s options for resettling this cohort are limited. It has at its disposal the remainder of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/01/white-house-australian-refugees-deal-resettle-extreme-vetting">1,250 refugee places</a> promised by the United States in November 2016 and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/mar/24/australia-agrees-450-refugees-can-be-resettled-in-new-zealand-nine-years-after-deal-first-offered">450 refugee places</a> over three years promised by New Zealand in 2022. Even if all these places are used, hundreds of people will remain in limbo.</p>
<h2>What happens to last week’s arrivals?</h2>
<p>Since Operation Sovereign Borders began, boats have either been intercepted at sea or have managed to make landfall in Australia <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadattachment?attachmentId=dc14c17a-6ca6-4082-8f77-c15a72b19314">every year</a> except 2021. </p>
<p>However, between the start of Operation Sovereign Borders and the end of August 2023, <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadattachment?attachmentId=dc14c17a-6ca6-4082-8f77-c15a72b19314">only two</a> out of the 1,123 boat passengers involved to that point had ever been accepted for regional processing. Both cases were in 2014. </p>
<p>This statistic raised serious concerns about the reliability of the screening process as the people screened included many from known refugee producing countries. </p>
<p>Given this history, it was a little surprising when the Australian government transferred <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-27/nauru-new-group-detained-processing-centre/103014910">11 unauthorised maritime arrivals</a> to Nauru in September 2023. A further 12 were transferred to Nauru in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/23/wa-border-force-custody-12-asylum-seekers-nauru">November 2023</a>. The 39 people found in Western Australia have just been transferred there too. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/aus-nz-refugee-deal-is-a-bandage-on-a-failed-policy-its-time-to-end-offshore-processing-180241">Aus-NZ refugee deal is a bandage on a failed policy. It's time to end offshore processing</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It seems the screening process has been abandoned or has been vastly improved. While the most reliable way for Australia to meet its international protection obligations would be to give all unauthorised maritime arrivals access to its protection visa application process, giving them all access to regional processing is certainly better than sending them back to their country of departure. </p>
<p>However, resettlement in Nauru of those found to be refugees is not realistic. The country, which has a population of approximately 13,000 people, is only <a href="https://www.adaptation-undp.org/explore/asia-and-pacific/nauru#:%7E:text=Nauru%20is%20an%20isolated%2C%20uplifted,120%20and%20300%20metres%20wide.">2,200 hectares</a> in land area. To put this in context, Melbourne airport <a href="https://www.melbourneairport.com.au/corporate/master-plan">is larger</a> than Nauru. </p>
<p>There is no reason to believe it will be any easier to find third country resettlement for transferees in the future than it has been up to now. For most, the only way out of limbo will be to return home, as eight of those transferred to Nauru in September have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/jan/22/australia-asylum-seekers-nauru-returned-home-country">already done</a>. Regional processing continues to be a policy failure for which vulnerable people will pay the price.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223957/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Savitri Taylor has received funding from the Australian Research Council in the past. She is a member of the Committee of Management of Refugee Legal and a member of the Kim for Canberra party. Views expressed in this article are her own and not attributable to any organisations with she is associated.</span></em></p>With the arrival of 39 foreign nationals in Western Australia, debate around boat arrivals has been re-ignited. What happens if you come by plane instead?Savitri Taylor, Associate Professor, Law School, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1862942022-07-21T01:30:22Z2022-07-21T01:30:22Z3 types of denial that allow Australians to feel OK about how we treat refugees<p>As one of its first acts in government, the newly elected Labor government <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-24/labor-turns-back-election-day-asylum-seeker-boat-arrival/101095322">turned back a boat</a> of Sri Lankan asylum seekers trying to enter Australia. </p>
<p>Labor has <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/albanese-government-turns-around-its-first-asylum-seeker-boat-20220524-p5ao2y.html">vowed to continue Operation Sovereign Borders</a>, including boat turnbacks and offshore detention. This is concerning. Not only do <a href="https://www.newsouthbooks.com.au/books/refugee-rights-policy-wrongs/">turnbacks violate international law</a>, but offshore detention has resulted in <a href="https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/Treaties/CAT/Shared%20Documents/AUS/INT_CAT_NGO_AUS_18683_E.pdf">torture and cruel and inhuman treatment</a> of refugees. </p>
<p>Even more concerning is the lack of criticism Labor has received for continuing offshore detention and turnbacks. Apart from being condemned by <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/albanese-government-turns-around-its-first-asylum-seeker-boat-20220524-p5ao2y.html">human rights groups</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-24/labor-turns-back-election-day-asylum-seeker-boat-arrival/101095322">minor political parties</a>, Labor’s refugee policies appear to have gone without much comment from a large part of the Australian public. </p>
<p>As I found in <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jrs/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jrs/feac041/6646968?login=true">my new research paper</a>, the Australian government has used three forms of denial, creating physical and psychological distance between itself and refugees.</p>
<p>This allows the federal government to promote illegal and harmful policies while proclaiming to still be upholding human rights.</p>
<h2>Creating indifference</h2>
<p>Human rights abuses in offshore detention have been <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa12/002/2013/en/">well documented</a>. </p>
<p>On Manus Island (in Papua New Guinea) and Nauru, refugees have <a href="https://law.stanford.edu/publications/communique-to-the-office-of-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-under-article-15-of-the-rome-statute-the-situation-in-nauru-and-manus-island-liability-for-crimes-against-humanity/">faced torture</a>, inhumane detention, overcrowding, violence from guards, sexual assault and rape, and mental harm. Children as young as nine have suffered <a href="https://msf.org.au/sites/default/files/attachments/indefinite_despair_4.pdf">severe depression and attempted to commit suicide</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/operation-sovereign-borders-offshore-detention-statistics/2/">According to the latest data by the Refugee Council</a>, 112 people remain on Nauru and just over 100 people are on Manus Island. Although New Zealand will <a href="https://theconversation.com/aus-nz-refugee-deal-is-a-bandage-on-a-failed-policy-its-time-to-end-offshore-processing-180241">now resettle</a> many of them in the coming years, Nauru detention centre will continue to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/24/australia-signs-deal-with-nauru-to-keep-asylum-seeker-detention-centre-open-indefinitely">remain open indefinitely</a>.</p>
<iframe src="https://embed.acast.com/60087127b9687759d637bade/6229bddd9ece8600127d4f71" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="190px"></iframe>
<p>How can Australia continue to <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/international-relations/themes/human-rights">promote itself as upholding human rights</a>, while at the same time maintain such policies? </p>
<p>One answer is that offshore detention has created indifference to the suffering of refugees. Australia’s policy framework has produced what the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has called “<a href="https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N20/188/03/PDF/N2018803.pdf?OpenElement">moral disengagement</a>”. This involves “the self-deceptive denial of reality” by denying the wrongfulness of, responsibility for, or occurrence of, human rights violations. </p>
<p>These “self-deceptive” strategies reduce moral dilemmas that come from violating human rights norms.</p>
<p><a href="https://academic.oup.com/jrs/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jrs/feac041/6646968?login=true">My research</a> found Australian federal governments have used three forms of denial to push refugees out of sight and out of mind – denial of responsibility, denial of fact, and denial of wrongdoing.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cruel-costly-and-ineffective-australias-offshore-processing-asylum-seeker-policy-turns-9-166014">Cruel, costly and ineffective: Australia's offshore processing asylum seeker policy turns 9</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>3 types of denial</h2>
<p><strong>Denying responsibility</strong> </p>
<p>The government has denied responsibility over refugees in offshore detention by denying it has jurisdiction. The term “jurisdiction” <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/au/academic/subjects/law/human-rights/access-asylum-international-refugee-law-and-globalisation-migration-control?format=PB">is different</a> from sovereign territory. A state can have jurisdiction outside of its sovereign territory when it <a href="https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#%7B%22fulltext%22:%5B%22HIRSI%20JAMAA%20AND%20OTHERS%20V.%20ITALY%22%5D,%22documentcollectionid2%22:%5B%22GRANDCHAMBER%22,%22CHAMBER%22%5D,%22itemid%22:%5B%22001-109231%22%5D%7D">exercises effective control over others</a>. </p>
<p>Showing that a country has jurisdiction over others is important. It can help hold states accountable for human rights abuses and establish responsibility for those in its care. </p>
<p>The Australian government has <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/Manus_Island/Report">argued</a> that PNG and Nauru – which aren’t part of Australia – have jurisdiction over the detention facilities and the refugees in them. It claims all Australia does is provide financial and material support.</p>
<p>Such arguments make it difficult to hold Australia accountable. But they are also incorrect. <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Regional_processing_Nauru/Regional_processing_Nauru/Final_Report">A Senate inquiry</a>, the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Regional_processing_Nauru/Regional_processing_Nauru/Submissions">UN High Commissioner for Refugees</a>, and <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/08/02/australia-appalling-abuse-neglect-refugees-nauru">human rights groups</a>, among others, have argued Australia exercises effective control and shares jurisdiction with Nauru and PNG. </p>
<p>Denying jurisdiction creates physical and psychological distance between itself and refugees, helping to create indifference. By denying responsibility, human rights abuses become someone else’s problem.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1512278034954571776"}"></div></p>
<p><strong>Denying fact</strong> </p>
<p>A second key strategy is denial of fact. The Australian government, along with the governments of Nauru and PNG, has <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-37675003">denied human rights abuses</a> and made it hard to find out what occurs in offshore detention. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/NauruandManusRPCs/Report">Human rights monitors</a> and <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Regional_processing_Nauru/Regional_processing_Nauru/Final_Report">journalists</a> have been restricted or denied access to offshore detention.</p>
<p>Staff have been <a href="https://law.stanford.edu/publications/communique-to-the-office-of-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-under-article-15-of-the-rome-statute-the-situation-in-nauru-and-manus-island-liability-for-crimes-against-humanity/">threatened with prosecution</a> under confidentiality agreements if they speak publicly about detention treatment. </p>
<p>Operation Sovereign Borders has also been shrouded in <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/08/02/australia-appalling-abuse-neglect-refugees-nauru">secrecy</a>. For example, it was common for <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/may/21/scott-morrison-breaks-own-rule-against-commenting-on-on-water-matters-to-confirm-asylum-boat-intercepted">Coalition</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jun/10/peter-dutton-invokes-on-water-secrecy-over-claim-of-payments-to-boat-crew">ministers</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2013/s3887267.htm">border force officials</a> to refuse to answer questions in the media about “on water matters”. </p>
<p>As Peter Young, the former mental health director of IHMS, the medical provider in immigration detention, <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa12/4934/2016/en/">stated</a>: “Secrecy is necessary because these places are designed to damage”.</p>
<p>These policies have made it difficult to know what occurs in offshore detention. They also create doubt about whether such harm is even happening at all.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/95HgnR2gAXU?wmode=transparent&start=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p><strong>Denying wrongdoing</strong> </p>
<p>Along with “stopping the boats”, the government has argued offshore detention has been necessary to save lives at sea.</p>
<p>When former UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Méndez criticised Australia for violating the UN Convention against Torture in 2015, then Prime Minister Tony Abbott <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/tony-abbott-australians-sick-of-being-lectured-to-by-united-nations-after-report-finds-antitorture-breach-20150309-13z3j0.html">stated</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>The most humanitarian, the most decent, the most compassionate thing you can do is stop these boats because hundreds, we think about 1200 in fact, drowned at sea during the flourishing of the people smuggling trade under the former government.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a key strategy of self-deception. By arguing the policy is saving lives, it focuses attention away from the harm refugees suffer, to the humanitarian goal of “saving lives”.</p>
<p>Moral dilemmas about torture or ill treatment are pushed aside, and so are feelings of wrongdoing. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-temporary-visa-system-is-unfair-expensive-impractical-and-inconsistent-heres-how-the-new-government-could-fix-it-185870">Australia's temporary visa system is unfair, expensive, impractical and inconsistent. Here's how the new government could fix it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Challenging indifference</h2>
<p>Key to ending this illegal and harmful policy is to challenge these self-deceptive strategies that have produced moral disengagement. </p>
<p>Other countries, such as the UK, are following in Australia’s footsteps by <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-seals-deal-with-rwanda-to-offshore-asylum-migrant-seekers/">introducing offshore detention</a> for asylum seekers. This means challenging strategies that deny reality – and widening our circle of empathy – is more urgent than ever.</p>
<p>It’s indifference that’s helping to maintain offshore detention. And it’s this indifference that needs to be challenged to both respect international law and uphold the rights and dignity of refugees.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/186294/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jamal has received funding from the Australia-Germany JRC Scheme (UA-DAAD) and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO).</span></em></p>Australia’s offshore detention policies have helped to produce indifference to the suffering of refugees. Pushing refugees out of sight, and out of mind, has now placed them beyond moral concern.Jamal Barnes, Lecturer, Edith Cowan UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1815012022-04-22T13:58:58Z2022-04-22T13:58:58ZHow the UK’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda is 21st-century imperialism writ large<p>In announcing his plan to <a href="https://theconversation.com/outsourcing-asylum-seekers-the-case-of-rwanda-and-the-uk-180973">partner with Rwanda</a> to manage migration, Prime Minister Boris Johnson claimed, on April 14 2022, that the UK is “<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-on-action-to-tackle-illegal-migration-14-april-2022">a beacon of openness and generosity</a>”. He lauded the great British tradition of offering sanctuary to those who seek it through legal routes while outlining how he intends to curb what he termed illegal migration.</p>
<p>Under this new <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abd_ArqW_bM">scheme</a>, people claiming asylum in the UK are to be relocated to Rwanda, where their cases will be processed. If they are granted asylum, they will be encouraged to remain in Rwanda for at least five years. </p>
<p>While the UK government <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/asylum-seekers-rwanda-one-way-ticket-not-get-refugee-status-uk-1575281">has promised</a> smooth operations, it is unclear how asylum seekers relocated from the UK might be accommodated in Rwanda, beyond temporary plans to convert <a href="https://news.sky.com/video/rwanda-inside-hope-guest-house-accommodation-for-uk-channel-migrants-12590080">a former hostel</a> into a detention centre. There is also no sense of what will happen to those who are not granted asylum. </p>
<p>Religious, international and human rights organisations are questioning the legality of this process. However, this attempt to move the immigration process offshore is not unique. It is part of <a href="https://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/176073/1/OSI%20009-18%20Offshoring%20asylum%20and%20migration.pdf">a wider strategy</a> deployed by the powerful governments of richer nations, from Australia to the EU, to discourage unwanted arrivals by creating conditions that are hostile or inhumane. </p>
<p>And while they outsource migration management to low-income countries, these richer countries are furthering their own geopolitical interests. Human displacement is becoming a motor for what experts – from Canadian activist and author <a href="https://www.acme-journal.org/index.php/acme/article/view/1823">Harsha Walia</a> to British political scientist <a href="https://monthlyreview.org/2015/07/01/imperialism-in-the-twenty-first-century/">John Smith</a> – identify as 21st-century imperialism. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91206-6">Migration</a> is not merely a consequence of poverty, inequalities, conflict and environmental crises. It is a <a href="https://www.academia.edu/50781503/Ivekovic_Europe_and_contemporary_migrations">political tool</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A Border Force boat pictured returning to Folkestone Harbour, with white cliffs in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459311/original/file-20220422-26-minung.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Rwanda deal is the UK government’s latest strategy to restrict unwanted immigration to Great Britain.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/folkestone-kent-united-kingdom-february-24th-1324300796">Susan Pilcher | Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Politics of exclusion</h2>
<p>Sending asylum seekers to another country strips them of <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/uk/1951-refugee-convention.html">their right</a>, as afforded by the International Refugee Convention, to have their cases considered in the country in which they have chosen to seek refuge. It denies them agency. It doubles their displacement. And it exposes them to prolonged uncertainty and further risk, namely, Rwanda’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/14/rwanda-human-rights-fears-paul-kagame">worrying</a> human rights record. In 2018, in particular, a dozen refugees were reportedly killed by Rwandan police after protests outside the offices of the UN high commissioner for refugees in Karongi district.</p>
<p>The UK government has said that the scheme will apply mainly to undocumented single men. Its key aim is to tackle the business model of people smuggling. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/TCMirregularmigration.pdf">Research</a> shows, however, that <a href="https://cdn.theconversation.com/static_files/files/2079/1436958842.pdf?1650453096">for the most part</a>, undocumented migrants are fleeing areas affected by conflict, poverty and environmental crises, among other problems. </p>
<p>Comparing the Rwanda deal, then, with the safe haven opened up to Ukrainian refugees in recent weeks, it is clear that <a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/uk-governments-rwanda-asylum-seeker-plan-reeks-of-racial-prejudice-angus-robertson-msp-3658199">UK immigration policy</a> is biased in terms of race, religion and skill-set. </p>
<p>Further, Johnson has called the Rwanda scheme a prototype, suggesting that it could be replicated elsewhere. There are certainly precedents, including Australia’s infamous arrangements with <a href="https://theconversation.com/multibillion-dollar-strategy-with-no-end-in-sight-australias-enduring-offshore-processing-deal-with-nauru-168941">Nauru</a> and with Papua New Guinea to house asylum seekers on <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10304312.2018.1468414">Manus Island</a> These so-called processing centres are effectively places of detention. </p>
<p>The EU, meanwhile, is in talks, via its border and coastguard agency <a href="https://frontex.europa.eu">Frontex</a>, with the government of Niger to establish frontier zones on African soil. With the support of the International Organization for Migration, the aim is to keep undocumented people there while their cases are processed. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Protestors in Australia hold up signs decrying the government's detention of refugees offshore." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/459316/original/file-20220422-15-5iy5vm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Precendents for the UK’s Rwanda scheme include the Australian government’s detention centres on Nauru and Manus Island.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/sydney-australia-july-20-2019-hundreds-1460462129">Holli | Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>21st-century imperialism</h2>
<p>Research shows that plans like these are a <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1035304617739759">strategy of empowerment</a> for already powerful nations. They allow them to offload, back to poorer countries, unwanted migrants, especially those who come from outside of Europe. At the same, they give <a href="https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/bisa21/9781526159014/imperialism-and-the-development-mythimperialism-and-the-development-myth/">those richer nations </a> a political and economic <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/45197784">foothold</a> in regions of interest. </p>
<p>When Johnson’s government closed down the Department for International Development in 2020, merging it with the Foreign Office, he effectively did away with international aid. International development was, instead, folded into diplomacy – directed by national and international political strategy. </p>
<p>The UK’s offer of £120 million to kickstart this partnership is attractive for Rwanda precisely because it comes under the aegis of development. The country is ranked 160th out of 189 in the 2021 <a href="https://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/RWA.pdf">Human Development Index</a>, has long been a recipient of <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/913346/Rwanda-Profile.pdf">UK foreign aid</a> and <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/DT.ODA.ALLD.CD?locations=RW">international assistance</a> and already hosts nearly 130,000 refugees, <a href="https://reporting.unhcr.org/rwanda">90% of whom</a> remain in refugee camps and transit centres. The scheme would help elevate Rwanda’s international profile as an engaged partner in global migration and refugee governance. </p>
<p>For the UK, meanwhile, it represents <a href="https://waronwant.org/resources/new-colonialism-britains-scramble-africas-energy-and-mineral-resources">yet another business interest in Africa</a>. </p>
<p>At the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz43FAea7W0">UK-Africa Investment Summit</a> held in 2020, Johnson emphasised the UK’s ability to “support ventures” and desire to “strengthen partnerships” with Africa. While this growing relationship with the continent is framed in the positive terms of development, the <a href="https://www.waronwant.org/resources/new-colonialism-britains-scramble-africas-energy-and-mineral-resources">question arises</a> about the UK’s larger intent. </p>
<p>As partnerships go, these are fundamentally unequal. They seek to <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/3-graphs-that-explain-why-investing-in-africa-is-good-for-uk-firms">fortify</a> the UK’s economy by way of foreign investments that bring back more revenue than the original outlay. Investing in poorer countries overseas is financially beneficial to the UK. It is also part of the UK government’s <a href="https://brexitcentral.com/supporting-overseas-investment-british-companies-can-bring-vast-benefits-uk/">post-Brexit strategy</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.routledge.com/International-Trade-and-Sustainable-Development-Economic-Historical-and/Milward/p/book/9781032085098">Evidence</a> shows that, in the long term, the surplus from such investments inevitably flows back to the richer countries. This perpetuates global <a href="https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-662-44766-6">structural inequalities</a>. It does little to sustain development. </p>
<p>Africa is both struggling to develop amid myriad environmental, social and economic problems and is rich in resources. Not only does Rwanda have a mining industry in tin ore, gold, tungsten ore and methane, it is also home to <a href="https://www.africanews.com/2022/01/20/in-rwanda-kivuwatt-transforms-gas-from-killer-lake-into-electricity/">Lake Kivu</a>, which is enormously rich in gases and a potential source for <a href="https://www.africanews.com/2022/01/20/in-rwanda-kivuwatt-transforms-gas-from-killer-lake-into-electricity/">energy generation</a>. </p>
<p>The Rwanda scheme presents troubling echoes of the UK’s imperial past: the colonial transportation of slaves and indentured workers across continents and seas; the empowerment of the imperial heartland through the violence that accompanied its historical ravages, for which reparation can never be complete. In a repeat of colonial politics, it tasks Africa yet again with working to the UK’s interests for only short-term financial benefits. In the long term, Africa’s needs remain unmet.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181501/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Parvati Nair does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Richer nations are increasingly looking to offshore their immigration processing and further their own economic and political interests at the same time.Parvati Nair, Professor of Hispanic, Cultural and Migration Studies, Queen Mary University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1219472019-08-22T10:10:09Z2019-08-22T10:10:09ZMigrants on hunger strike follow long tradition of people using their bodies to protest against cruelty<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288957/original/file-20190821-170941-d3qihc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=227%2C311%2C3730%2C2383&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Migrants in immigration detention are turning to hunger strikes as a weapon of last resort.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Igor Kisselev/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Those Western states pursuing more aggressive border control policies in recent years have increased the use of immigration detention centres. These are often squalid, degrading places where detainees are deprived of their most basic human rights and due process. </p>
<p>A recent <a href="https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2019-07/OIG-19-51-Jul19_.pdf">report</a> for the US Department of Homeland Security concluded that there was “dangerous overcrowding” at detention facilties in Texas, with adults and children crammed together for prolonged periods.</p>
<p>Those caught in the legal black hole of detention lack political rights of free speech and participation, but this has not prevented them from fighting back using one of the few weapons left at their disposal – sovereignty over their own bodies.</p>
<p>More than 100 detainees recently went on <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/ice-detainees-hunger-strike-pepper-sprayed-excessive-force-1452953">hunger strike</a> in Louisiana to protest the arbitrary denial of their parole and release. In El Paso, four Indian asylum seekers who have been locked up for over a year have been on <a href="https://avid.chihuahuan.org/2019/08/04/amidst-a-community-crisis-asylum-seeker-on-26th-day-of-hunger-strike-rushed-to-er/">hunger strike</a> since the beginning of July. </p>
<p>Migrants and asylum seekers have also engaged in political self-starvation in France, Spain, the UK, Italy, Mexico, Indonesia, New Zealand, Greece, and many other states across the world. In the UK, there have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/aug/15/more-than-3000-hunger-strikes-at-immigration-centres-in-uk-since-2015">been more than 3,000 hunger strikes</a> in immigration removal centres since 2015, according to figures recently released by the Home Office. </p>
<p>In Australia’s offshore detention centres of Manus and Nauru, there have been numerous hunger strikes, sometimes <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/dec/04/four-asylum-seekers-manus-sew-lips-together-mass-hunger-strike">accompanied by lip-sewing</a> and even acts of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/may/03/nauru-self-immolation-led-to-up-to-50-similar-threats-and-attempts">self-immolation</a>. While some protests focus on individual asylum cases, others take aim at wider policy.</p>
<p>A hunger strike by 100 women at the Yarl’s Wood detention centre in the UK in 2018 <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/yarls-wood-women-hunger-strike-detention-centre-home-office-flight-a8653111.html">demanded an end</a> to the state’s practice – unique in the EU – of detaining people without legal time limits.</p>
<p>Authorities have frequently resorted to threats and intimidation in an attempt to disrupt these protests. The Yarl’s Wood protesters received a letter from the Home Office <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/06/minister-defends-deportation-threats-over-yarls-wood-hunger-strike">warning them that their actions</a> could result in their “removal from the UK taking place sooner”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/i-befriend-women-detained-at-yarls-wood-their-life-in-immigration-limbo-is-excruciating-92905">I befriend women detained at Yarl's Wood: their life in immigration limbo is excruciating</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In El Paso, hunger strikers were force fed earlier this year, and a judge recently <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/19/us-cease-force-feeding-migrant-hunger-strikers">authorised</a> the force-feeding of three of the Indian detainees, despite unequivocal condemnation of the practice by the <a href="https://www.wma.net/news-post/wma-condemns-all-forced-feeding/">World Medical Association</a>, the <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/american-medical-association-opposes-force-feeding-prisoners-on-hunger-strike-at-gitmo-15747cb2d109/">American Medical Association</a> and <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/19/us-cease-force-feeding-migrant-hunger-strikers">other leading organisations</a>. These reports bring to mind the chilling accounts of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/jul/08/mos-def-force-fed-guantanamo-bay-video">force-feeding</a> of prisoners through nasal tubes in Guantanamo Bay, which provoked international condemnation.</p>
<h2>A powerful tool</h2>
<p>The hunger strike has long been understood as a weapon of last resort by the powerless and disenfranchised. It can involve either a time-limited symbolic refusal of food, or – in more extreme cases – a prolonged fast that eventually leads to loss of cognition, organ damage and even death.</p>
<p>In medieval Ireland, people <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Hunger.html?id=8C-jOdT4LqYC&redir_esc=y">would fast</a> on the doorstep of those they believed had wronged them; if they died, the accused inherited their debts. Ancient India had a similar practice. </p>
<p>In the early 20th century, British suffragettes first used hunger strikes as a tactic to demand recognition as political prisoners. The suffragette Sylvia Pankhurst <a href="https://slate.com/human-interest/2013/07/sylvia-pankhurst-the-suffragette-s-first-person-account-of-force-feeding.html">wrote of the </a> “sickening sensation” of force-feeding, though she noted that the “sense of degradation” was even worse than the pain.</p>
<p>The tactic was then borrowed by Irish republican prisoners, <a href="https://www.prio.org/Global/upload/CSCW/Violence%20in%20civil%20war/Irish%20hunger%20strikes%20(US).pdf">ten thousand</a> of whom went on hunger strike in British prisons between 1916 and 1923. The brilliant and harrowing film, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9IiUbBV4zc">Hunger</a>, by Steve McQueen, portrays the most famous republican hunger strike in the Maze prison, Belfast, when Bobby Sands starved to death in 1981 with nine other prisoners. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288950/original/file-20190821-170914-1a2rmvc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bobby Sands, who was elected MP during his time in prison, died after a hunger strike in 1981.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Evan McCaffrey/Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Mahatma Gandhi used political fasting to great effect against the British in India and to pressure Hindus and Muslims to halt sectarian violence. He came to regard the hunger strike as one of the most powerful tools in the arsenal of non-violent resistance.</p>
<p>South African anti-apartheid activists, Turkish Marxists, Palestinian militants and Tibetan monks have likewise used hunger strikes with varying degrees of success, along with thousands of ordinary <a href="https://www.amnestyusa.org/happening-now-california-prison-hunger-strike-highlights-need-for-reform/">prisoners</a> protesting solitary confinement and other abuses.</p>
<h2>Self-destructive resistance</h2>
<p>At first glance, such acts of self-destruction might seem oddly irrational or self-defeating. Many forms of resistance – such as a classic workers’ strike – aim to place economic and other costs on opponents. Yet with the hunger strike, the most severe costs are suffered by protesters, who risk pain, bodily damage and even death.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, detainees know that the refusal of food can shame the authorities who bear ultimate responsibility for the lives of those in their custody. In this way, it can be understood as a form of “<a href="https://civilresistance.info/sites/default/files/thepowerofnonviolence0206.pdf">moral jiu jitsu</a>” that uses the overwhelming power of the modern state against it.</p>
<p>By striking, hunger strikers also exert some measure of control against a system that micromanages their lives and strips them of agency. They demonstrate that they are sovereign over their own bodies and that the most serious decision of all – over life and death – is still in their hands.</p>
<p>As Guantanamo detainee Lakhdar Boumediene <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/145549/force-fed-guantanamo-guards-now-worse">put it</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>They could lock me up for no reason and with no chance to argue my innocence. They could torture me, deprive me of sleep, put me in an isolation cell, control every single aspect of my life. But they couldn’t make me swallow their food.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>For detained migrants and refugees, the choice of such an extreme technique is powerful evidence of the cruelty they are subject to in detention, and their moral determination to resist. Caged and herded like animals, they exhibit the characteristically human capacity of mastering their natural appetites in pursuit of a higher ideal.</p>
<p>While authorities in the US and elsewhere frequently attempt to dismiss hunger strikers as pathological and mentally ill, the strike is in reality a careful and deliberate form of political action. As such, hunger striking should be respected as an expression of the fundamental human right to protest, as set out in <a href="https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/">Article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights</a>.</p>
<p>This means that immigration authorities around the world must refrain from force-feeding, and all other forms of intimidation and listen to the just claims of detainees regarding their treatment.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121947/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Guy Aitchison does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Hungry for dignity, migrants are resisting their cruel detention using the only tool left available to them.Guy Aitchison, Lecturer in Politics and International Studies, Loughborough UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1116452019-02-13T02:34:02Z2019-02-13T02:34:02ZExplainer: how will the ‘medevac’ bill actually affect ill asylum seekers?<p>Both the House of Representatives and the Senate have now passed <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6069">amendments to the Migration Act 1958</a> that allow for the medical evacuation of asylum-seekers from Manus Island and Nauru. These amendments are also known as the medevac bill.</p>
<p>So, how will the situation for asylum seekers and refugees on Manus Island and Nauru change with the provisions in place?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-government-was-defeated-on-the-medevac-bill-but-that-does-not-mean-the-end-of-the-government-111635">The government was defeated on the 'medevac' bill, but that does not mean the end of the government</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What’s in the Bill?</h2>
<p>The medevac bill allows for the transfer of asylum seekers or refugees on Nauru or Manus Island to Australia for “medical or psychiatric assessment or treatment”. Family members will also be transferred if recommended.</p>
<p>It gives a clear pathway for medical specialists to make medical decisions. Two doctors must assess – either in person or remotely – the person and make the recommendation for transfer. The criteria used in the initial assessment and in any review is that the person:</p>
<ul>
<li>needs medical or psychiatric assessment or treatment</li>
<li>is not receiving appropriate medical or psychiatric assessment or treatment in Nauru or Manus Island, and</li>
<li>must be transferred for appropriate medical or psychiatric assessment or treatment.</li>
</ul>
<p>The recommendation is given to the Minister for Home Affairs who must either approve or refuse the transfer within 72 hours. The minister can refuse the transfer if the person has an adverse security assessment or if the person has a “substantial criminal record”. </p>
<p>The minister may also refuse the recommendation on the basis he does not accept the transfer is necessary on medical grounds. In those cases an expert medical panel – known as the Independent Health Advice Panel (IHAP) – would be formed to reassess the recommended transfer. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/morrison-government-defeated-on-medical-bill-despite-constitution-play-111636">Morrison government defeated on medical bill, despite constitution play</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>If the panel recommends the person’s transfer should be approved, the minister must transfer the person unless satisfied there are security or character grounds for refusing the transfer.</p>
<p>The panel will consist of at least eight members, including the Chief Medical Officer for the government, the Department of Home Affair’s Chief Medical Officer and the Surgeon-General of the Australian Border Force. Other members would be appointed by the minister based on nominations by various professional medical bodies.</p>
<p>Medical transfers to Australia are for a temporary period only, so those currently in Australia could still be returned to Nauru or Manus Island following their treatment. This will continue to be the case even now this bill is passed.</p>
<p>These procedures are only applicable to asylum seekers and refugees who are on Nauru and Manus Island currently. The law will not apply to anyone who comes after the passage of this bill. Anyone brought to Australia for medical treatment must be kept in onshore immigration detention.</p>
<h2>Three examples</h2>
<p>Medical transfers that <a href="https://www.msf.org.au/sites/default/files/attachments/indefinite_despair_3.pdf">have occurred to date</a> are mostly for psychiatric reasons or a combination of psychiatric and other medical reasons. The importance of provided, rapid medical assessment and response to critically ill, or at-risk-of-dying, refugees and asylum seekers cannot be overstated.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258642/original/file-20190213-90488-m17ytm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Under the provisions of the medevac bill, asylum seekers with medical or psychiatric conditions can be transferred to Australia.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In August, 2014 a 24-year-old Iranian detainee on Manus Island, Hamid Khazaei, <a href="https://www.minterellison.com/articles/inquest-into-the-death-of-hamid-khazaei">fell ill and presented to clinicians</a> at the detention centre with “flu-like symptoms” and a small lesion on his leg. After a course of antibiotics, his condition deteriorated and he was transferred to a hospital in Papua New Guinea. He died a few days later. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.minterellison.com/articles/inquest-into-the-death-of-hamid-khazaei">coronial inquest</a> identified ambiguous and deficient policies for emergency evacuation, finding Mr Khazaei’s death was preventable. If his clinical deterioration was recognised and responded to in a timely manner, and he was evacuated to Australia within 24 hours of developing severe sepsis, Khazaei could have survived.</p>
<p>Medical evacuations are time sensitive because of the nature of the emergency and the logistics of the transfer itself. Were the provisions of the medevac bill in place at the time, independent expert overview of clinical decisions could have saved Khazaei’s life.</p>
<p>Another case was that of a <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2018/1432.html">refugee woman on Nauru</a> who attempted suicide. An order was made for her to be urgently transferred to Australia. This was based on reports from a psychiatrist and a surgeon who expressed concerns that, without urgent surgical intervention, she could develop peritonitis (a life-threatening inflammation resulting from her suicide attempt) and die. </p>
<p>This case was heard by the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2018/1432.html">Federal Court</a> within four days of her attempt. Evidence demonstrated she needed complicated surgical intervention and psychiatric care that appeared not to be available on Nauru. Medical evacuation to Australia was requested as soon as possible, and the woman was brought to Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/self-immolation-incidents-on-nauru-are-acts-of-hopeful-despair-58791">Self-immolation incidents on Nauru are acts of 'hopeful despair'</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>With the medevac provisions in place, the woman could have been brought to Australia earlier for an independent assessment of her physical and mental health prior to her situation deteriorating to a point where emergency management was required. The costs and delays involved in seeking intervention of the courts to order medical evacuations would also have been reduced with the provisions in place.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2018/1350.html">Another recent case</a> involved a 46-year-old refugee on Manus Island who had lost vision in his right eye after a traumatic injury during a riot on the island. Vision in his left eye was also deteriorating and there was a lack of appropriate treatment in PNG. His mental health had also deteriorated to a point where he was assessed as being at high risk of suicide.</p>
<p>The evidence was that Manus Island did not have adequate facilities to treat his physical deterioration and suicidality. The court ordered his transfer to Australia as soon as possible for assessment and treatment.</p>
<p>Again, this man could have been brought to Australia earlier for an independent assessment, prior to emergency life saving treatment being required. The bill’s provisions will now allow for this. This translates to continuity and consistency of care and reduced deadlocks over treatment decisions.</p>
<h2>Medical care can’t be political</h2>
<p>Aside from being a circuit breaker to current arrangements, the bill is a new opportunity to establish agreed governance arrangements and a clinical pathway for recognising and responding to medical need without political interference. In the past bureaucrats and politicians have invalidated medical evidence and clinical decision making processes. </p>
<p>To provide safe and high quality care to refugees and asylum seekers based on medically assessed need, independent medical experts must be provided with all available relevant information about the patient. Giving the best medical and health advice must be free from delay and political interference.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111645/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicholas Procter has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council, Department of Home Affairs and Australian Red Cross. He has received sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mary Anne Kenny has received funding from the Australian Research Council. She has received sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs.</span></em></p>A bill to allow for asylum seeker on Nauru and Manus Island to be transferred to Australia for medical and psychiatric treatment has passed both Houses. How will it change things for those detained?Nicholas Procter, Professor and Chair: Mental Health Nursing, University of South AustraliaMary Anne Kenny, Associate Professor, School of Law, Murdoch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1054872018-10-23T08:16:43Z2018-10-23T08:16:43ZAs children are airlifted from Nauru, a cruel and inhumane policy may finally be ending<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241792/original/file-20181023-169831-chyly1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">If refugee and asylum seekers are not resettled in Australia, the humanitarian crisis will only worsen.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Jeremy Ng</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australia’s off-shore detention policy is unravelling. Predictably, after five years of detention, the mental health of adults and children who have been left in indefinite detention on Nauru is collapsing. On Monday, 11 children and their families <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-22/eleven-children-transferred-from-nauru-for-medical-attention/10416348">were flown to Australia</a> for urgent medical attention. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/23/labor-says-its-prepared-to-strike-deal-with-coalition-to-get-children-off-nauru">New Zealand deal,</a> under which some asylum seekers could be resettled in New Zealand as long as they are banned from ever coming to Australia, is now being seriously considered.</p>
<h2>Good politics, bad policy</h2>
<p>From the middle of 2013, when off-shore processing was re-started on Nauru and Manus Island, the <a href="http://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/release/transcript-22763">Rudd government</a>, and later the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jan/11/new-zealands-offer-to-take-150-offshore-refugees-a-year-never-taken-up">Abbott government</a>, made bold and irresponsible claims that no asylum seeker attempting to enter Australia by boat would ever be resettled here. </p>
<p>This played well to an Australian public spooked by a dramatic rise in boat arrivals under the Rudd government between 2009 and 2013, and set the foundation for a policy that has systematically brutalised hundreds of innocent people.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/same-old-rhetoric-cannot-justify-banning-refugees-from-australia-67923">Same old rhetoric cannot justify banning refugees from Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The claim, in the name of deterrence, relied on hopes Australian governments would find places to resettle the asylum seekers and refugees on Nauru and Manus Island in other countries. But there was no plan as to where they might go and, predictably, resettlement proved very difficult. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jan/11/new-zealands-offer-to-take-150-offshore-refugees-a-year-never-taken-up">An agreement with the Cambodian government</a> failed because Cambodia lacks the capacity to resettle people of such different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. </p>
<p>Malcolm Turnbull seemed to have <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-deal-is-a-good-news-story-for-refugees-heres-why-it-took-so-long-68716">stumbled upon a resolution</a> when the Obama administration agreed to take sone refugees from Nauru and Manus. </p>
<p>The current US administration has <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-23/labor-backs-moving-refugee-children-on-nauru-to-new-zealand/10416720">resettled 276 people</a> from Nauru and rejected a further 148. There may be more resettlements to come, but there is no clear timetable, and it will be a resolution for only some of the 652 people remaining on Nauru. </p>
<p>Inexplicably, the Australian Government has repeatedly rejected an <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/national-video/news/video.cfm?c_id=1503075&gal_cid=1503075&gallery_id=199728">offer from New Zealand</a> to resettle 150 refugees there, fearing that people will take advantage of open migration between Australia and New Zealand and will end up resettling here. </p>
<p>Under renewed pressure from opposition parties, the government is reconsidering the New Zealand offer, but only if there is a travel ban preventing refugees ever coming to Australia. Prime Minister Scott Morrison <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/wentworth-vote-puts-more-pressure-on-scott-morrison-to-get-children-off-nauru-20181022-p50b9l.html">has drawn</a>, once again, on the tired justification that to allow asylum seekers any right of entry to Australia may encourage people smuggling. </p>
<h2>Why the people smuggling argument does not stack up</h2>
<p>The people smuggling narrative does not withstand reasonable scrutiny. How much cruelty to innocent people on Manus and Nauru is really needed to stop the boats? </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/resettling-refugees-in-australia-would-not-resume-the-people-smuggling-trade-60253">A comparison</a> with the Howard years is instructive. From 2001 to 2008, of the 1,153 refugees and asylum seekers resettled on Nauru and Manus Island, 705 went to Australia, 401 to New Zealand and 47 to other Western countries. Most were resettled between 2002 and 2004.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/resettling-refugees-in-australia-would-not-resume-the-people-smuggling-trade-60253">Resettling refugees in Australia would not resume the people-smuggling trade</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>These resettlements were not followed by a resumption of the people smuggling trade. From <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/PacificSolution#_Toc334509642">2002 to 2007</a>, 18 boats arrived with 288 asylum seekers. In addition, one boat was turned back with 14 passengers.</p>
<p>What remained important for deterrence was the possibility of being detained offshore with no guarantee of being settled in Australia and New Zealand. Only when this possibility was removed (when the new Rudd government dismantled the Howard government’s offshore processing and turn-back policies) was there a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1314/QG/BoatArrivals">dramatic spike</a> in asylum seekers arriving by boat. </p>
<h2>The message of deterrence is clear</h2>
<p>The systemic cruelty of detaining refugees in offshore detention centres indefinitely has sent an unequivocal message to any asylum seekers who might contemplate seeking asylum in Australia by boat. No person would countenance subjecting themselves to the mental and physical trauma suffered by detainees on Nauru and Manus Island for the chance of receiving protection in Australia. And no parent would risk subjecting their child to a lifetime of mental illness.</p>
<p>The Australian government has proved its mettle. It is prepared to subject innocent people to the cruellest of punishments, to disregard basic principles of human dignity, and to ignore its obligations under international law. This is deterrent enough for any prospective boat rider. </p>
<h2>Time to end an inhumane policy</h2>
<p>It is well past time to resettle every refugee and asylum seeker on Manus and Nauru in Australia. If this is done while the policies of boat turn backs and offshore detention remain in place, this will not lead to a resumption of people smuggling operations. And if I am wrong in this, we can be confident of stopping the boats again, as the government did with startling effectiveness in 2001 and 2013. </p>
<p>It seems that the government may finally be softening its untenable hard line. With no other resolutions on the table, most of the refugees on Nauru and Manus must end up in Australia or New Zealand. </p>
<p>Until this happens, the mental health of refugees stuck on Nauru and Manus will continue to deteriorate, and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-17/australias-top-doctor-on-nauru-to-be-deported-today/10385970">courageous whistleblowers</a> will continue to risk their employment revealing the brutality and trauma of conditions in detention. </p>
<p>All this pain and suffering, and economic cost, for a deterrent that is not needed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105487/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alex Reilly receives funding from the Commonwealth Department of Social Services on a project investigating Refugee Women and Work.</span></em></p>As families are airlifted off Nauru for medical treatment, there is at last a glimmer of hope that a long-standing and cruel policy might finally be put to rest.Alex Reilly, Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit, Adelaide Law School, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/987062018-06-25T04:50:30Z2018-06-25T04:50:30ZYes, the US border policy is harsh – but Australia’s treatment of refugee children has also been deplorable<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224597/original/file-20180625-152164-l7lecu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Villawood Detention Centre, NSW. There are currently 200 asylum seeker children in detention, in Australia and offshore.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Australian Human Rights Commission</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>US President Donald Trump’s <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/trumps-cruelty-and-the-crying-children">policy of separating children</a> from their families at the Mexican border has sparked outrage in recent months, both in the US and abroad. It became so heated that <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-21/donald-trump-immigration-executive-order-explainer/9877622">he eventually ended</a> the separation of families, though their fate remains unclear.</p>
<p>However, Trump is not the only leader to incarcerate children and use their suffering as a form of deterrence. The detention of asylum-seeker children has a long and brutal history in Australia. Trump’s policy invites us to reflect on our own policies regarding the detention of asylum seekers and the situation of children and families fleeing persecution.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.asyluminsight.com/statistics/#.WzBcmNIzaUk">Currently, over 200 children</a> are in asylum-seeker detention, including on Nauru, in mainland detention centres and in community-based detention. Many have endured prison-like conditions, with no clear date for their release for months, if not years. </p>
<p>While most children remain with one of their parents, my research has found that separation of families is common. This includes the removal of young men on their 18th birthdays from their families with no warning or follow-up as to their whereabouts. </p>
<p>The mandatory incarceration of asylum-seeker children is an uncommon practice globally. It contravenes important human rights instruments to which Australia is a signatory, most notably the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx">Convention on the Rights of the Child</a>. This states:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily … (This) shall be used only as measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The degree of despair felt by children and their families is <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seekers-and-refugees/publications/health-and-well-being-children-immigration">well-documented</a> and goes back many years.</p>
<p>In 2004, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) published <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seekers-and-refugees/projects/last-resort-report-national-inquiry-children">A Last Resort? National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention</a>. This document outlined the privations of the lives of those held in detention centres in Australia, including the famous case of <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/traumatised-in-detention-shayan-now-thrives-on-his-life-in-australia-20080926-4oxz.html">Shayan Badraie</a>. He was detained for nearly two years, witnessing attempted suicide, self-harming and violence that resulted in several hospital admissions before the family was released.</p>
<p>The report also documents physical assault by guards, mental illness and lack of appropriate food, shelter and education.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/accusations-of-deliberate-cruel-abuse-of-refugee-children-must-prompt-a-more-humane-approach-67154">Accusations of deliberate, cruel abuse of refugee children must prompt a more humane approach</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A Last Resort not only documents terrible human rights abuses, but the ongoing effects on those who experienced them. But, far from ending the incarceration of children and their parents, the policy of detention as deterrence has continued. In this regard, Australia is unusual, being the only developed country that imposes mandatory detention on people arriving by boat.</p>
<p>In 2014, the HREOC conducted another investigation, <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/document/publication/forgotten_children_2014.pdf">The Forgotten Children</a>. This report documents in detail ongoing breaches of human rights, unsafe living conditions, medical neglect and physical and sexual assault.</p>
<p>Dehumanisation occurs on every level. One 16-year-old boy stated:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>People were called by boat ID. People had no value. No guards called me by name. They knew our name, but only called by boat ID.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Children are also constantly exposed to the trauma of other detainees. One father said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The word of “suicide” is not an unknown word to our children anymore. They are growing up with these bitter words. Last week a lot of women took action to suicide in Construction Camp. All the kids were scared and crying. How do we remove these bad scenes from our kids’ memories?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The report documents other cases of despair. A 13 year-old-boy detained on Nauru expressed to the treating doctor “a complete loss of hope; despair”. The doctor described how “[h]e had no appetite and no will to eat. He lost over 10 kilograms, which would be about a quarter of his body weight.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/sending-children-back-to-nauru-risks-creating-a-generation-of-damaged-people-54115">Sending children back to Nauru risks creating a generation of damaged people</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Australian government has tried to hide the conditions experienced by those held in places like Nauru and Manus Island. In particular, the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2015A00040">Border Force Act</a> (2015-17) imposed criminal sanctions on workers who speak publicly about what they see.</p>
<p>However, there is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/aug/10/the-nauru-files-2000-leaked-reports-reveal-scale-of-abuse-of-children-in-australian-offshore-detention">overwhelming and easily accessible evidence</a> that Australia’s policies cause both immediate and ongoing trauma to children, and indeed all those incarcerated in detention. We must recall that Australia is a signatory to the Refugee Convention and that seeking asylum is enshrined in this instrument.</p>
<p>So while we can express moral outrage about things that occur far from home, our <a href="https://theconversation.com/robert-manne-how-we-came-to-be-so-cruel-to-asylum-seekers-67542">own policies ensure</a> human rights breaches that cause unnecessary suffering and trauma for long periods of time.</p>
<p>There is now substantial evidence of the poor treatment of asylum-seeker children. This has come from a plethora of reports from human rights organisations, healthcare providers and detainees like <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/profile/behrouz-boochani">Behrouz Boochani</a>, who document and publish the conditions of incarceration.</p>
<p>They remind us of what the Holocaust historian Yehuda Bauer said: “Do not be a victim; do not be a perpetrator; and above all, do not be a bystander.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98706/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Deborah Zion received an ARC Discovery grant entitled Caring for Asylum Seekers in Australia. Bioethics and Human Rights.
2/01/07 → 31/07/11. (With Linda Briskman and Bebe Loff)</span></em></p>Over 200 children are still in asylum seeker detention within Australia and offshore – so why aren’t we more outraged about that?Deborah Zion, Associate Professor and Chair, Victoria University Human Research Ethics Committee, Victoria UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.