Boat Arrivals, Australia and Human Rights

Australia’s policy of imprisoning all asylum seekers who travel to Australia by boat has been strongly criticized by human rights supporters. During a visit to Australia in May 2011 the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, urged the Australian Government to end the mandatory detention policy. Amnesty International has repeatedly condemned the policy, saying Australia needs to do more to protect the rights of asylum seekers and refugees. Despite this, it is unlikely that the policy of mandatory detention will be changed.

Partly responding to the criticism of human rights campaigners, the Australian Government announced that asylum seekers arriving by boat could be granted Bridging Visas in November 2011. The Bridging Visas would allow asylum seekers to live in the community while their applications for refugee status were decided. According to the Immigration Department, however, bridging visas are granted on a case by case basis and priority is given to the most vulnerable and those who have been in detention for a long time. The behavior of asylum seekers in detention is also taken into account. Since November only 107 asylum seekers have been let out of detention on bridging visas and 4,409 people remain locked up.

The possibility of Bridging Visas for asylum seekers arriving by boat is a step towards a more gentle response to boat arrivals but it does not mean the end of compulsory detention. Historically, Australia’s policies towards boat arrivals have got harsher when the number of people arriving by boat increases. Mandatory detention laws were introduced in Australia in 1992 by the then Labor government in response to the increasing numbers of asylum seekers from Vietnam, China, and Cambodia trying to reach Australia by boat. The law said that Australian Courts were not allowed to review the decision to detain asylum seekers but said that they could not be detained for longer than 273 (approximately nine months). In 1994 the same government changed the law again, making it even harsher by ruling that mandatory detention could last indefinitely for anyone who came to Australia by boat without a valid visa.

In 2001, in response to the increasing numbers of asylum seekers arriving by boat, the then Liberal Government (led by John Howard) introduced the Pacific Solution. Before 2001, the highest number of asylum seekers boats to arrive in Australia was 19, carrying a total of 660 asylum seekers. In 2001, 43 boats arrived carrying 5,516 asylum seekers. Responding to this increase, the Australian government declared that the Australian islands between Indonesia and the Australian mainland were no longer part of Australia’s migration zone and all asylum seekers arriving by boat would be taken to a detention centre on the tiny island of Nauru. Many of the asylum seekers in Nauru were detained for years. The number of boats arriving dropped dramatically.

In 2008, the newly elected Labor government (this time led by Kevin Rudd) announced that it was ending the Pacific Solution but that some aspects of the detention system would stay the same. Asylum seekers arriving by boat would still have their refugee status determined offshore (on Christmas Island) but they would be let out of detention faster. In October 2010, the new Labor Prime Minister, Julia Gillard said that more changes would be made to the policy so that children and families could stay in community-based accommodation instead of the detention centre. However, since 2008, the number of boats arriving has steadily increased. In 2010 134 boats carried 6,879 asylum seekers to Australia.

Because the numbers of asylum seekers have increased so dramatically, it is likely that mandatory detention will continue to be used as a deterrent. Both of the major political parties in Australia remain convinced of the need for offshore processing and are just debating about where it will take place. The detention center in Nauru is one of the options being discussed. Amnesty International has said that the prospect of reopening Nauru is “horrifying” because “asylum seekers were locked up for years, away from lawyers, media, human rights advocates and community support. They were often not given proper information about what was happening and what rights they had.” Amnesty believes that there is a declining respect for the human rights of asylum seekers in Australia.