I am trying to so hard not to read the news

[dreamer_easy]

But I failed.

Australia Puts Its Refugee Problem on a Remote Island, Behind Razor Wire. New York Times, 5 November 2009

"The arrival of illegal boats filled with Asians evokes a primordial fear here, one that has been instilled over past decades of anti-Asian immigration policies."

(The NYT errs here, of course: seeking refuge in Australia is 100% legal.)

Comments

[redrose999.livejournal.com]

I heard about what they're attempting to do to the Midwives too... Sometimes it's best to avoid bad news. I blow a casket over it....

[hiraethin.livejournal.com]

Indeed. The phrasing is incorrect. But, to be sure, to be a non-citizen in Australia without a valid visa is to breach the Migration Act. It would be more accurate to say, "The arrival of boats filled with unlawful Asian non-citizens..."

But an accurate understanding of the law on this point is uncommon enough in Australia; one might excuse the NYT for its failure, half a world away. Or not - they are journalists, for whom the collection and accurate publication of facts is their role.

This is the nub of the migration debate: seeking refuge in Australia is legal, but entering Australia without a visa is not.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

I think you're mistaken about the Migration Act. It's not an offence for asylum seekers to enter Australia without a visa and apply for it here. They're not breaching the Act, but are in fact complying with it.

[hiraethin.livejournal.com]

My reading of the text is that asylum seekers in Australia do not breach the Migration Act if they are, in fact, refugees, and thus entitled to asylum. Whether they are refugees can only be determined after they apply for refugee status. If they only apply for refugee status after entering Australia - as is often the case for persons arriving in Australia without visas - then, should they be assessed as not being refugees, they would be in breach of the Act.

This is such a contentious issue that it often seems impossible to deal with the bones of it rather than the emotive fluff. For example, I see illegal migration as a legal, ethical and economic issue. *rolls up sleeves*

[hiraethin.livejournal.com]

Legally, asylum seekers who enter the country without visas are putting themselves in risky position, by wagering that their application for refugee status will be approved, and thus negate the breach of law. For Australia, the law is the law; existing laws must be enforced or changed.

Ethically, asylum seekers may see themselves as pursuing a higher ethical principle than that of Australian law - seeking the best possible outcome for themselves and/or their families, in terms of the country and society in which they will settle. Nonetheless by attempting to apply for refugee status within Australia, instead of elsewhere, is an effort to game the system, which they do by paying snakeheads considerable sums, risking their lives and their families' lives in unsafe voyages, in order to achieve a goal beyond that of just being recognised as a refugee - being recognised as a refugee in Australia, and thus entitled to the fruits and opportunities of the Australian system, rather than what another society might provide. For Australia, there is a responsibility to take all reasonable steps to protect Australians, visitors and refugees - but this responsibility is not unlimited where people choose to expose themselves to risk, especially when they do so while ignoring other, less risky options.

Economically, Australia is a desirable destination country both for refugees and for persons of all kinds resident in less successful societies. Desirability is a factor motivating asylum seekers. The perception of increasing or decreasing enforcement or legal barriers affects asylum seeker numbers, as do other factors such as regional and global economic performance and regional instability. However, Australia cannot much influence regional and global economic performance and regional instability. Australia can, however, influence the perception of increasing or decreasing enforcement or legal barriers to illegal - would you prefer unorthodox? - migration.

[ikhet-sekhmet.livejournal.com]

Seeking refuge is not "gaming the system". Entering Australia and applying for a refugee visa here is complying with the system. I think the HREOC FAQ makes that clear.

Stopping the boats is quite simple. All Australia has to do is set up a program in Indonesia to process asylum seekers and bring the successful visa applicants here. Such a program is long overdue.

[hiraethin.livejournal.com]

*boggle*

You mean they can't?

But that's a necessary part of my argument! /whine

Just to confirm: asylum seekers cannot seek refugee status in Indonesia? Or they can, but cannot do so and reliably gain settlement in Australia?

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

Neither of us are lawyers. Can you point to any evidence which supports your reading of the Act? IMHO there's not much point in listing assertions without giving something (a FAQ, a statistic, a report, a fact sheet, a legal opinion) to back them up. Reason without evidence just produces noise.

[hiraethin.livejournal.com]

Well, only the Act itself. I just read it for a while.

Section 14, specifically, defines unlawful non-citizens as follows:

(1) A non‑citizen in the migration zone who is not a lawful non‑citizen is an unlawful non‑citizen.

(2) To avoid doubt, a non‑citizen in the migration zone who, immediately before 1 September 1994, was an illegal entrant within the meaning of the Migration Act as in force then became, on that date, an unlawful non‑citizen.

This, in conjunction with the information at the HREOC page you linked above, is the basis for my opinion expressed in my second comment.