Australian immigration policies are constantly the topic of discussion and heated contention of many legal experts, international human rights bodies and United Nations conferences and meetings for all the wrong reasons. There are countless claims and warnings of breaches of international law and convention by Australian immigration officials, with many legal experts labelling Australian policies as harsh. For decades Australian policies have ignored these outcries but in light of recent public awareness it is time for change in Australian constitution.
Claims by international groups such as human rights advocates and the United Nations have long criticised off shore processing of asylum seekers in any context. These groups claim that Australia …show more content…
According section 189 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) “an officer may detain any unlawful non-citizen is attempting to enter the migration zone of Australia”. This is another policy set in place by Australian immigration control to act as a deterrent for illegal immigrants. It was adopted in 1992 and is the ground on which the Border Protection Bill 2001 (Cth) allows the Australian navy to send illegal maritime vessels to offshore processing facilities. However unlike offshore processing, which is exclusively for persons arriving by boat, mandatory detention is used for persons arriving by any mean of transport. Current mandatory detention policy states that “all non-citizens who are in Australia without a valid visa are to be detained whilst being processed, this means that immigration officials have no choice but to detain persons who arrive without a visa, or persons who arrive with a visa and subsequently become unlawful because their visa has expired or been cancelled” (88 ALJ 707 2014, p.2-3). According to aph.gov.au The main issued of contention related to these policies are Detention conditions, length of detention and the detention of …show more content…
According to SMH.com.au The United Nation’s Human Rights council have recently issued AUstralia with a warning that Australia's harsh policy is costing them a seat on the Council. Although Australia is a large country with a low population that encourages immigration it is reluctant to accept refugees and currently only receives 2.2% of the total number of refugees 5 times less than Germany and 7 times less than France. The leading solution to both of the issues of arbitrary, mandatory detention and offshore detention being community detention This policy has proven to work in the UK where refugees are housed within the private housing sector and required to regularly report to the local UK Border Agency. The implementation of a Bill of Rights in an Australian context in Australia could also aid in the humane treatment of refugees in the offshore processing facilities. To conclude with the words of ir Anthony Mason who stated “Australia's adoption of a Bill of Rights would bring Australia in from the cold, so to speak, and make directly applicable to the human rights jurisprudence which has developed internationally and
Claims by international groups such as human rights advocates and the United Nations have long criticised off shore processing of asylum seekers in any context. These groups claim that Australia …show more content…
According section 189 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) “an officer may detain any unlawful non-citizen is attempting to enter the migration zone of Australia”. This is another policy set in place by Australian immigration control to act as a deterrent for illegal immigrants. It was adopted in 1992 and is the ground on which the Border Protection Bill 2001 (Cth) allows the Australian navy to send illegal maritime vessels to offshore processing facilities. However unlike offshore processing, which is exclusively for persons arriving by boat, mandatory detention is used for persons arriving by any mean of transport. Current mandatory detention policy states that “all non-citizens who are in Australia without a valid visa are to be detained whilst being processed, this means that immigration officials have no choice but to detain persons who arrive without a visa, or persons who arrive with a visa and subsequently become unlawful because their visa has expired or been cancelled” (88 ALJ 707 2014, p.2-3). According to aph.gov.au The main issued of contention related to these policies are Detention conditions, length of detention and the detention of …show more content…
According to SMH.com.au The United Nation’s Human Rights council have recently issued AUstralia with a warning that Australia's harsh policy is costing them a seat on the Council. Although Australia is a large country with a low population that encourages immigration it is reluctant to accept refugees and currently only receives 2.2% of the total number of refugees 5 times less than Germany and 7 times less than France. The leading solution to both of the issues of arbitrary, mandatory detention and offshore detention being community detention This policy has proven to work in the UK where refugees are housed within the private housing sector and required to regularly report to the local UK Border Agency. The implementation of a Bill of Rights in an Australian context in Australia could also aid in the humane treatment of refugees in the offshore processing facilities. To conclude with the words of ir Anthony Mason who stated “Australia's adoption of a Bill of Rights would bring Australia in from the cold, so to speak, and make directly applicable to the human rights jurisprudence which has developed internationally and