Abolishing free legal advice to asylum seekers — who really pays?

Image source: unhcr.org

One week before the 2013 federal election, the Coalition announced that, if elected, it would no longer provide funding for free legal advice to asylum seekers who have arrived without a valid visa. The primary concern for the Coalition was clearly the increasing cost of providing this service. However, one month prior to the Coalition’s announcement, the Government had entered into a regional resettlement arrangement with Papua New Guinea which meant all future boat arrivals would be processed abroad with no access to the Immigration Advice and Application Assistance Scheme (IAAAS). Nonetheless, there are estimated to be in excess of 30,000 asylum seekers in Australia that will be affected by this proposed change.

A return to Temporary Protection Visas?

Image source: Australian Human Rights Commission

On 18 October 2013 the newly elected Coalition Government registered an amendment to the Migration Regulations 1994 providing for the re-introduction of Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs). Unsurprisingly, given their vocal opposition to TPVs, the Australian Greens have moved to disallow the Regulation. This FlagPost provides an historical overview of the TPV, and outlines the arrangements that will be in place should the new TPV system withstand the disallowance motion.

Complementary protection: open and accountable or 'opening the floodgates'

Image source: DIAC

Media reports have suggested that the decision by the Full Federal Court in the case of SZGIZ v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] FCAFC 71 has ‘exposed an embarrassing loophole’ in current migration law that could ‘leave the door open to thousands of asylum seekers who have already been rejected as refugees’. While the decision is significant in that it allows for a further protection visa claim to be made by an individual who has previously had a claim rejected, the characterisation of the decision as potentially ‘opening the floodgates’ is dubious. At issue is not whether there are loopholes allowing for questionable claims for protection to be made, but the processes Australia engages to fulfil its protection obligations arising under international law.

World Refugee Day



Image source: UNHCR
 

On Thursday 20 June people around the world will celebrate World Refugee Day, which was first marked in 2001 following the adoption of a UN General Assembly resolution in December 2000. World Refugee Day is an opportunity to increase awareness about the world’s growing number of refugees, asylum seekers and forcibly displaced people. Events will be held around the world, including in Australia, to celebrate the achievements of refugees and highlight the many challenges they still face.

ASIO security assessments of asylum seekers

Image source: ASIO

Recent media reporting and questioning in the May Budget Estimates hearings have again focused attention on security processes relevant to the processing of asylum seekers, with one particular case leading the Prime Minister to direct an Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security inquiry into ‘the management of [by] Australian government agencies of persons seeking asylum who present complex security issues’.

Asylum seekers and income management

The Shadow Immigration Minister, Scott Morrison, recently proposed that certain asylum seekers living in the community should be required to work on community projects in exchange for food and accommodation vouchers. The vouchers would be instead of cash, which Mr Morrison said could be used to pay 'people smugglers debts'. The Immigration Minister, Brendan O'Connor indicated that the idea was one 'worth considering'.

While media reports and commentary have suggested a relationship between the 'work for vouchers' proposal and income management, there are actually some significant differences between the two.

Asylum seekers and refugees—how will they be affected by this year’s Budget?

It is expected that there will be several items in this year’s Budget directly affecting asylum seekers and refugees, some of which will require significant increases in expenditure. In particular, funding associated with the cost of intercepting and detaining irregular maritime arrivals (IMAs) is likely to increase significantly.

However, other recent Government announcements affecting asylum seekers and refugees will also require additional funding—most notably the Government’s decision to increase the number of places available under the Humanitarian Program and the decision to increase the family reunion stream of the Migration Program by 4000 places for humanitarian entrants (and remove access to family reunion under the Humanitarian Program for IMAs). This FlagPost provides background on the changes to the Migration and Humanitarian programs that will have flow on effects for asylum seekers and refugees, both offshore and onshore.

Boat arrivals on the mainland: what difference does it make?

Image source: www.immi.gov.au

On 9 April 2013, Customs and Border Protection advised the Minister for Home Affairs that a suspected irregular entry vessel (SIEV) had arrived in Geraldton harbour in Western Australia. The boat is thought to have been carrying 66 people (officially known as irregular maritime arrivals or IMAs) from Sri Lanka.

According to Parliamentary Library research compiled from departmental and ministerial press releases, these were the first IMAs on Australia’s mainland since November 2008. According to the Minister for Immigration, there were 19 undetected mainland arrivals during the Howard Government—mostly prior to 2002. Between 2002 after the introduction of the ‘Pacific Solution’ and 2008 when the ‘Pacific Solution’ was formally dismantled by the Rudd Government there were four according to publicly available information:

Global asylum trends 2012: how does Australia compare?

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) recently released its latest report on the number of asylum applications lodged in the 44 industrialised countries that provide statistics to the UNHCR.

The 2012 report, Asylum levels and trends in industrialized countries, recorded the second highest number of applications this decade with 479 300 asylum applications lodged (the highest level was in 2003 when there were 505 000 applications). Afghanistan remained the main country of origin of asylum-seekers in 2012, followed by Syria with a 191 per cent increase in asylum claims.

The High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, noted that both new (Syria) and old (Afghanistan) conflicts were contributing to the rise in claims and that wars were ‘driving more and more people to seek asylum’. However, Guterres also pointed out that the asylum claims lodged in industrialised countries were only a drop in the ocean compared to the levels of displacement experienced closer to the regions of conflict:

In most cases people seeking refuge from conflict choose to remain in countries neighbouring their own in hope of being able to return home (an example is Syria, where the figure of 24, 800 Syrian asylum claims in industrialized countries compares to more than 1,100,000 registered Syrian refugees currently in neighbouring countries). 

Asylum seekers, refugees and people smuggling—links to the key Parliamentary Library papers

The Parliamentary Library has recently released several new and updated papers on asylum seekers, refugees, boat arrivals and people smuggling.

Links to these papers are included below together with links to other research papers in related areas.

 

Australia's first National Children's Commissioner

Image source: NSW Family and Community Services

On 25 February 2013 the Government announced the appointment of Australia's first National Children's Commissioner, Ms Megan Mitchell. The position of National Children’s Commissioner will sit within the Australian Human Rights Commission and commences on 25 March 2013. In its announcement, the Government outlined the Commissioner's legislative mandate to 'focus on vulnerable or at-risk groups of children, such as children with a disability, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, homeless children or those who are witnessing or subjected to violence'.

Hunger strike on Nauru

Image source: DIAC newsroom

The hunger strike which commenced on Nauru on 1 November is continuing. Initial reports were that 170 people were participating although more recent estimates by the Refugee Action Coalition suggest around 300. Commencement of the hunger strike was in response to the attempted suicide on October 31 and in protest to the lack of certainty about when processing will begin. This follows previous reports of self harm on Nauru and suicide attempts (see reports from 11 October, confirmed by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) at Estimates on 15 October 2012 at p. 100 of Hansard, and 27 October).

High Court holds security risk provision invalid

Image source: Wikipedia

There has been extensive reporting on the recent High Court decision concerning the impact of an adverse ASIO assessment on an asylum applicant.

In its decision of 5 October 2012 in the matter of Plaintiff M47-2012 v Director General of Security [2012] HCA 46, the High Court ruled public interest criterion 4002, contained in Schedule 4 to the Migration Regulations 1994, to be invalid. This criterion provided:

4002 The applicant is not assessed by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation to be directly or indirectly a risk to security, within the meaning of section 4 of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.

Children in immigration detention



Image source: A last resort? National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention


As part of the Government’s response to the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers, it would appear that children will again be held in processing centres on Nauru. This policy has been subject to sustained criticisms by refugee advocates, human rights groups and government backbenchers. The debate in the Parliament last week reflected this, with many voicing opposition and deep disquiet to the return of such an approach. While not much is known about the arrangements and conditions specifically for children on Nauru in the past, this Flag Post provides a brief history of the effects on children in detention in the Australian context and a summary of some of the key research papers about the impact on children in detention.

Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers and regional processing: legislation before the Senate

Image source: Australia Awards

The Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers released its Report on Monday 13 August 2012. On 14 August 2012, in response to the panel’s recommendation to reintroduce processing on Nauru and Manus Island, the Government resumed debate on the Migration Legislation Amendment (Offshore Processing and Other Measures) Bill 2011, which had been introduced in the House of Representatives on 21 September 2011.

Breaking the deadlock? The Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers

Image source: Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet

On 28 June 2012 the Prime Minister and the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship announced that the Government would establish an expert advisory panel to consider options for “the best way forward for our nation in dealing with asylum seeker issues”. This followed months of political deadlock over how to best manage the issue of increasing numbers of asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat, following the High Court’s rejection of the Government’s planned transfer arrangement with Malaysia in August 2011.

In February 2012 independent Member Rob Oakeshott introduced a Bill aimed at breaking the deadlock, which was supported by the Government. The Bill passed through the House of Representatives on 27 June 2012 but was defeated in the Senate the following day, with neither the Opposition nor the Greens prepared to support it, albeit for very different reasons. With few options left available to it, the Government announced the creation of a panel to provide expert advice on the best way forward.

Update on statistics for boat arrivals

The Parliamentary Library produces a number of publications about asylum seekers and immigration. The publication, Boat arrivals in Australia since 1976 provides a brief overview of the historical and political context surrounding boat arrivals in Australia. An update of the statistical appendix on boat arrival figures is provided below. Please note that the publication has not yet been formally updated.

World Refugee Day

Image source: http://www.unhcr.org/

In recognition of the 50th anniversary of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees in 2001, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution deciding that 20 June would be celebrated as World Refugee Day in order to increase awareness about the world’s growing number of refugees, asylum seekers and forcibly displaced people.

Immigration detention: what are the alternatives?



Image source: http://www.immi.gov.au/

 Since 1992 when the policy of mandatory detention was introduced in Australia, the detention of asylum seekers arriving unauthorised by boat has received a great deal of public attention. In particular, the duration and conditions of their detention have been controversial issues that have plagued successive governments since the early 1990s when there were several hunger strikes, rooftop demonstrations and suicide attempts at Villawood and Port Hedland immigration detention centres.

Asylum levels and trends 2011

Image source: UNHCR

On 27 March 2012, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) released the 2011 report on Asylum Levels and Trends in Industrialized Countries. After analysing asylum application trends in the 44 industrialised countries included in the report (38 European countries plus Australia, New Zealand, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Canada and the USA), the UNHCR found that an estimated 441 300 asylum applications were lodged in 2011—the highest level since 2003. In a press release accompanying the report, the UNHCR noted that ‘rising outflow from older crisis spots such as Afghanistan’ helped contribute to the 20 per cent rise in asylum claims in 2011.

Bucking the global trend, Australia experienced a 9 per cent decrease in asylum applications in 2011—the first decrease in six years. This is a reverse of the situation in 2010 when much of Europe experienced a decline in applications while Australia experienced a 33 per cent increase compared to the previous year.

So how significant are these fluctuations and how useful is it to compare asylum trends between Australia and other receiving countries?