|
Myths & Lies told about Asylum Seekers Are asylum seekers queue jumpers? There are no queues for Iraqi or Afghan refugees. Australia has no diplomatic presence in those countries and maintains trading sanctions imposed on Iraq by the United Nations Security Council in 1990. The typical route for an Afghan or Iraqi refugee is an overland escape into Pakistan then a flight to Thailand. Bangkok is the nearest Australian immigration centre in the region. Therefore, there is no official or standard process which provides for an orderly and direct departure for refugees from Iraq or Afghanistan. Are asylum seekers illegal? Generally it is not possible for a person fleeing persecution to obtain a visa to enter another country. This is why they apply for protection. The right to apply for asylum is a fundamental human right. Many asylum seekers are forced to leave their countries in haste or in secret and so are often unable to access appropriate documentation. In many cases authorities actively prevent migration and refuse to issue travel papers. In some cases, identifying documentation might be incriminating and may be destroyed for self-protection and the protection of family, friends and colleagues. Persons are entitled to make application for asylum in another country when they allege they are escaping persecution. Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that 'Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.' People who arrive on our shores without prior authorisation from Australia, with no documents or with false documents, are not illegal and they are not criminals; they are asylum seekers, a legal status under Australian and international law. The 1951 Convention does not specify the processes to use in determining whether or not a person fits the definition of a refugee. As a consequence, asylum seekers are assessed in different ways around the world, according to different legal and political regimes. It is important to remember that while many asylum applicants may not meet the strict Convention definition of a refugee, it does not mean that they are out to abuse the system, or that they have no claim on our compassion. Does Australia
take its share of refugees? In 2000-2001: Is Australia taking too many refugees? It is true that people smugglers are targeting Australia but the smugglers are targeting every other developed nation as well and their 'clients' come from the same places. Afghans, Iraqis and Iranians account for three of the top five nationalities seeking asylum in Britain. As long as the conditions in source countries do not improve, people smugglers will have a large pool of potential customers, despite the huge risks and enormous expense involved, and despite disincentives like detention and temporary visas. The real burden of assisting refugees is borne by the world's poorest nations. The main host countries remain Pakistan which shelters two million persons, Iran 1.9 million and Germany 976,000. (www.unhcr.ch) Closer to home, Thailand hosts more than 200,000 refugees from Burma. 71 countries accept refugees and asylum seekers, and on a per capita basis Australia ranks 38, slightly behind Kazakhstan, Guinea, Djibouti and Syria. Furthermore, Australia is one of the most difficult countries in the world to reach and because of this it is highly unlikely that we will ever see the large numbers of asylum seekers other countries experience. There is an erroneous perception that everyone in the world wants to come to Australia yet Australia is little known in the total scheme of things so it is unlikely that there will ever be large numbers of people seeking asylum here. There are currently millions of refugees waiting in camps on the borders of Afghanistan in a situation described by the UN as a 'human crisis of monumental proportions'. Australia accepts a tiny proportion of these displaced people. Are the asylum seekers genuine refugees? In the year ended June 1999, 97 per cent of applicants from Iraq and 93 per cent of applicants from Afghanistan seeking asylum in Australia were recognised as genuine refugees. Under Australian law they were found to be eligible to stay in Australia. Of all asylum seekers, 84 per cent are found to be legitimate refugees and are therefore legally entitled and eligible to stay here. (refugeecouncil.org.au) Despite continuing calls from Australian politicians for applications for asylum to be processed in Indonesia, Australia has not taken a single refugee from the UNHCR in Jakarta for more than five years. Some people have given up on the process and paid for boat trips to Australia. Among those who died when their ship sank off the coast of Indonesia in late 2001, 24 had already been granted refugee status. Many more had relations in Australia who had been granted asylum but were not allowed access to their families because of Temporary Protection Visa conditions. How wealthy are refugees? Some people think that those who have the resources to pay people smugglers could not possibly be genuine refugees. The UNHCR disputes claims about 'cashed up' refugees saying that payments made to people smugglers in fact range from $AU4,000 to $AU5,000. In reality, many families and communities pool their resources by selling everything they own in an attempt to send their loved ones to safety. People smuggling is dangerous and undesirable. It exists because the official resettlement programs run by the United Nations are tiny compared to the numbers of refugees concerned. Conditions in refugee camps are appalling and the current system fails to offer asylum seekers relief from their desperate and unrelieved misery; it fails to acknowledge the legitimacy of the claims of asylum seekers and their need to seek a better life. What sort of accommodation do detention centres offer? Global Solutions (a division of Group 4, FALCK) is a stands to make $770 million from the mandatory detention of asylum seekers in Australia. Conditions inside camps are extremely harsh. There are inadequate numbers of beds, limited bathroom facilities and inappropriate food. Detention centres even have solitary confinement cells. There is little or no access to legal information in languages other than English, health care facilities are poor, and nurses are given written instructions not to hug or excessively comfort the detainees. Even though children may be held for years, education programs are not available. In some camps, such as Port Hedland (now closed), detainees worked for $1 an hour in the kitchens and gardens. What is more, detainees are charged $150 a day for their accommodation which can add up to thousands of dollars by the time they are finally granted asylum. An 8-month detention costs the detainee about $35,000. Ex-detainees report that guards frequently tell the detainees that they are hated by all Australians and that upon their release they are likely to be beaten, harassed or worse. Mandatory detention in camps in remote areas is a violation of human rights and must be abandoned. Terrorists or innocent victims? There is no evidence that any asylum seekers arriving by boat have any connection to terrorism. Indeed, in an address to the "Inquiry into a Certain Maritime Incident" (the Children Overboard Inquiry) no less than the Director General of ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation) Mr Dennis Richardson, said that no terrorists had ever been found amongst the clientele of people smugglers. "Why would you send your best trained, most valuable personnel down a route which ended in mandatory detention, if not death along the way?" There is no evidence that asylum seekers threw their children overboard as claimed by the Australian Prime Minister and other government ministers. The links made by Phillip Ruddock and others between asylum seekers and terrorists following the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York were instances of racist demonising of innocent victims. The scapegoating of refugees by the government promotes fear and hysteria and has led to incidents of racially motivated personal abuse, verbal and physical. Those who perpetrated the 11 September 2001 attacks did not arrive in the United States as asylum seekers. The latest military retaliation by the US with the full support of NATO, including Australia, has had a devastating effect on the defenceless civilian population of Afghanistan. Reports have indicated that thousands of innocent civilians including refugees have been killed in the attacks on 'terrorists'. There are many other countries in the world that are enduring similar conditions of war, poverty and marginalisation, all factors that lead people to escape to a better life. References: |