Jade Roberts
Asylum seekers who are not successful in their claim for protection in Australia are still being deported to danger by the Australian Government.
Eight years since the Edmund Rice Centre published its first report, Deported to Danger,(1)revealing the terrible effects of the deportation of people to hostile countries, deportations continue to occur.
In December 2011 two Tamil men, Emil and Vithuran, were close to being removed from Australia and returned to Sri Lanka. Refugee supporters and activists delayed the transport of the men from Perth Immigration Detention Centre until a High Court injunction was issued, stopping the order for removal.(2)
This is amidst evidence that Tamils still fear persecution in Sri Lanka.(3)
The Deported to Danger report found that people deported from Australia faced both physical and psychological danger in the countries they were removed to. The report followed 40 asylum seekers who had been removed from Australia. 35 of them were found to be living in dangerous circumstances from the time of arrival.(4) Some were recognised as refugees by other countries after they were removed from Australia.(5)
In addition, the Australian Government was found to be exacerbating the danger posed to people in the countries of return. The report found that the practice of sending information about the person to the authorities of the receiving country resulted in imprisonments upon arrival.(6) The practice of encouraging people to get false passports and issuing short -term visas and travel documents ultimately forced people to live illegally.(7) It was even reported that the Government encouraged the payment of bribes to officials in the receiving countries to secure entry for those arriving.(8)
Non-refoulement is the legal obligation at the core of the Refugee Convention 1957, to which Australia is a party.(9) Non-refoulement prohibits the return of rejected asylum seekers to countries in which they may be unsafe.
Complementary protection legislation, introduced in March 2011, has widened the grounds on which people may be granted protection. However, given the flawed process of refugee determination, indicated by the proportion of decisions overturned by the Federal Magistrates Court, it is highly likely that Australia has already deported people deserving of protection.
It is prohibited under the Refugee Convention to deport failed asylum seekers to danger. It is morally wrong for the Australian Government to remove people who have experienced devastating disruption to their lives, traumatic journeys to Australia and the torture of indefinite mandatory detention, to countries in which they are unsafe.
References
1. Edmund Rice Centre, Deported to Danger: A study of Australia’s Treatment of 40 Rejected Asylum Seekers, September 2004, available at www.erc.org.au/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=80
2. As reported in The West Australian, December 13 2011, available at http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/12329541/high-court-halts-tamil-deportation/
3. Press Release of the Australian Tamil Congress, available at http://www.australiantamilcongress.com/en/media/press-release/127-tamil-fears-of-persecution-in-sri-lanka-very-real.html
4. Above n 1, p 2.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid, p 7.
7. Ibid, p 33.
8. Ibid, p 32.
9. Article 33 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees