Pacific Solution is No Solution

Australia's off-shore detention of asylum seekers has been called the Pacific Solution. Despite its grandiose title it is not a Pacific wide policy, as only two nations are participating, Nauru and Papua New Guinea, both countries that were once Australian colonies and remain dependent on Australia for aid.

Origins in the Tampa crisis

The Pacific Solution originated in the Tampa crisis of August 2001 when the captain of the Norwegian vessel the Tampa, at the request of the Australian government, rescued asylum seekers from a sinking boat. Prime Minister Howard then tried to stop the Tampa entering Australian waters.

Courting short-term electoral advantage, the government used armed forces to seize the Tampa and carry its asylum-seeker passengers to remote off-shore detention centres.

Doubtful legality

The act of seizing people in Australian territory and denying them rights granted by our laws was of dubious legality and was made 'legal' only through retrospective legislation, the Border Protection Act (passed with the full agreement of the Opposition) which exempts parts of Australia from federal immigration laws.

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (HREOC) strongly criticised the Border Protection Act, arguing that:
* The amendment bills erode the universal application of human rights.
* The bills undermine core international human rights guarantees.
* The amendment bills undermine judicial protection of human rights.

What is wrong with the 'Pacific Solution'?

The Pacific Solution merely exports Australia's controversial policy of mandatory detention to other, poorer countries. This policy is in clear breach of fundamental human rights as protected under the 1951 United Nations Convention on Refugees and the United Nations Convention. Article 31 of the Convention reads:

The Contracting State shall not impose penalties on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or are present on their territory without authorisation, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.

Who is protecting the rights of asylum seekers in the Pacific?

The Pacific detention camps are surrounded by even more secrecy than the detention centres in remote Australia. There is no way of knowing if the government is meeting even the most basic needs of the detainees, to whom it owes a duty of care.

Health Concerns

The living conditions on Nauru have been strongly criticised in a report commissioned by Amnesty International:

Conditions are harsh, with the heat and humidity consistently in the upper thirties and health facilities are basic. Medical staff does its best, but is nowhere near providing the essential psychological care that these people need, and need more with every day that passes.

The Royal Australian College of Physicians calls on the Howard government to evacuate all asylum seekers immediately from the PNG detention centre due to the danger they face there of contracting malaria.

Australia's Neo-Colonial Role

The Pacific Solution was not arrived at through negotiations between equal partners. As former Labor leader and Governor General, Bill Hayden, points out the Pacific Solution

"...is a thoroughly objectionable display of Australian neo-colonialism, of exploiting the dependency and vulnerability of poor non-white nations".

Nauru is one of the smallest nation states in the world. It is a country that has used up its natural resources and now faces bankruptcy.

Papua New Guinea was an Australian colony until 1975. Australia is the largest single aid donor to Papua New Guinea. Many Papuans New Guineans are asking why Australia is spending millions on the Manus Island camp when there are desperate humanitarian needs along their border with West Papua.

Over 8,000 refugees from Indonesian-ruled West Papua (Irian Jaya) live there in official and unofficial camps.

Opposition in The Pacific

Many Pacific Island governments, churches and civic organisations have criticised the Pacific Solution. Critics include:

• Leader of the Opposition in PNG Sir Michael Somare
• former Foreign Minister of PNG, John Pundari
• Fiji President Ratu Sir Josefa Iloilo
• Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry
• and Ratu Epeli Ganilau, chair of the Bose Levu Vakaturaga (Great Council of Chiefs).

In Nauru a petition was tabled in Parliament calling for 'Nauru's acceptance of asylum seekers on behalf of Australia to be terminated as soon as possible'.

An Uncertain Future

The ultimate fate of the asylum seekers imprisoned on Nauru and Manus Island remains uncertain. What will happen to these people if they are not offered resettlement? Nauru is not a signatory to the UN Convention and is therefore not bound to grant the asylum seekers those protections promised in the Convention.

PNG is a signatory to the Convention but exempts itself from several important clauses of the Convention.

Fortress Australia?

Western nations more and more are adopting the view that refugees are not victims in need of sanctuary, but a political problem to be solved by keeping them anywhere but here.
New York Times editorial, 21 February 2002

Throughout the world it is the poorer nations who bear the main brunt of the refugee crisis. Between them, Pakistan and Iran host around 3 million refugees. The Pacific Solution reinforces this trend.

Most refugees are in camps in Third World countries near their countries of origin and now, thanks to the Pacific Solution, they are being incarcerated in prison camps in Third World countries on the other side of the earth. It was this injustice in late 2001 that the Pacific Conference of Churches and regional church and non-government organisations addressed when they said:

We collectively reiterate our stand in safeguarding Pacific Islands dignity and refuse to see the Pacific region continuously becoming a dumping ground for the benefit of industrialised nations.

"End Mandatory Detention - Permanent visas not "Temporary Protection Visa" No Racist Scapegoating of Asylum Seekers - Let the Boats Land References include: Adrift In The Pacific: The Implications Of Australia's Pacific Refugee Solution - Oxfam Community Aid Abroad, 156 George Street, Fitzroy, Victoria 3065mAustraliam February 2002 at: http://www.caa.org.au/ Report Of Mission To The Republic Of Nauru, 8 To 13 November 2001 - John Pace's as yet unpublished report to Amnesty Refugees In The Pacific 26 October, 2001: Joint Statement by the Pacific Conferences of Churches, Pacific Desk of the World Council of Churches, Pacific Islands Association of Non-Governmental Organisations, Pacific Concerns Resource Centre, Pacific Theological College, Pacific Foundation for the Advancement of Women, Foundation of Peoples of the Pacific, Ecumenical Centre for Research and Advocacy, South Pacific Association of Theological Schools Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission submission on the Border Protection Act at http://www.hreoc.gov.au/ Also see Radio National's Unfinished Journeys site: http://www.goasiapacific.com/specials/journeys/default.htm.

return to background page