Urgent reform needed for Australia’s immigration detention system
Amnesty International has again warned that the policy of locking up asylum seekers indefinitely is unsustainable, inhumane and is causing devastating effects for the mental health of detainees.
An Amnesty International delegation is on a 12-day tour of immigration detention centres around Australia to assess conditions inside the facilities, and have so far visited centres in Curtin and Perth.
“Some men have been languishing in detention for up to 3 years. We spoke with men who felt like walking ghosts. We saw grown men break down in tears because of the uncertainty. This on top of fearing for the safety of their families left behind.”
"The level of distress we have seen in these centres is a clear indicator that the policy of indefinite mandatory detention does not work,” said Dr. Graham Thom, Amnesty International’s refugee spokesman.
The organisation has also expressed concerns with the Perth Immigration Detention Centre, which is close to maximum capacity, currently holding 37 detainees.
“Although there were differences in the characteristics of conditions in Curtin and Perth, there were obvious similarities in the damaging effects of detention.
“The cramped conditions of the Perth centre show that it is unsuitable for people to spend a significant amount of time there. Yet we met men who had been there for months, living in a small dorm room with up to eight other men,” said Dr. Thom.
“It is worrying that at Perth, vulnerable asylum seekers, many of whom have been transferred to undergo serious medical or mental health treatment, are sharing this space with people who have had their visas cancelled for character reasons.
“Many asylum seekers have been damaged by the detention system and it is about time this policy is overturned. We were pleased to see a shift in policy late last year to increase the use of bridging visas, but how this is playing out remains to be fully seen.”
The delegation’s tour will continue on to Christmas Island, then the Northern and Wickham Point facilities in Darwin. A short report on the group’s findings will be released at the conclusion of the tour, 16 February, with a comprehensive report on detention centre conditions due later in the year.
Comments
Andrew J S | Posted on 17 February 2012, 08:58AM | Report comment
Mieszko - completely agree on your first point.
And yes, no argument on humanitarian aid either.
The point of difference is the concept of fairness and equality for all - once here no group should receive advantages or benefits that others do not enjoy - this causes angst and animosity in those missing out on the benefits. (benefits such as free communication costs, housing, medical, electricity , food, education and cost of living expenses)
There are many hardships in most refugees past which of course is not fair - but this does not mean the Australian tax payer should compensate for past unfairness that has nothing to do with them. This may seem harsh to you, however their are others in our community who have had equally harsh pasts (parents murded, abusive step parents, abusive priests, bullied etc) that do not get any compensation or goverment assistance - these people have had to fend for themselves and some are now high taxpayers. Why should Australian tax payers compensate those from overseas when compensation is not available for those within our own community?
Mieszko | Posted on 16 February 2012, 11:19AM | Report comment
Andrew, unfortunately that’s more a case of what the media chooses to cover. “Influx of illegal aliens threatening to tear apart our way of life”? That’s big news. “Refugees are desperate, grateful individuals fleeing unimaginable horrors”? Less so. Politicans are also cynically making policy based on focus groups and polling. Moral leadership seems largely absent from most of our political discourse. It’s less about fact than impact.
I’m a little confused as to your concept of ‘fairness’ when we’re talking about, say, an individual who flees the war in Afghanistan after being tortured and having most his family murdered. When placed in context of murder, torture, genocide, war and other chilling atrocities, your frame of fairness becomes pretty detached. Is it ‘fair’ that these things have been experienced by these people?
Our government has always provided aid for humanitarian purposes - infact, all developed nations do. To remove humanitarian aid from the Federal budget would actually be a wildly extremist position to take.
Andrew J S | Posted on 16 February 2012, 09:38AM | Report comment
Micheal, there are 2 key marketing mistakes. The refugees are often viewed as ungrateful and or demanding and/or as economic refugees. We dont see much about the hardship in the refugees homeland, but we do see a lot about their insistence on making Australia their home and their unhappiness with the benefits they are given on arrival (note in recent news the push for tax deductible trips home for by immigrants - very bad publicity).
I would like to welcome every refugee into Australia so long as they can enjoy all the same government benefits I enjoy - that is they should pay carbon tax for their envirmentally unfreindly journey, they should get no assistance from the government whatsoever, they should pay an extra 1% medicare levy should they be so foolish not to take out private health cover on arrival - why are existing Australian tax residents subsidising those who did not even apply to come here? how is that fair? This is the elephant in the room nobody is addressing - its the sence of fairness for everyone. Civil unrest occurs when one group gets perceived advantage over another.
Michael Wild | Posted on 12 February 2012, 01:20PM | Report comment
Sadly Marilyn, the present policy (ALP+Coalition) is not something we can hope they’ll stop when they “grow up” . They are smart, slippery people who’ve figured out it’s a good way to get elected (Coalition) or avoid getting unelected (ALP). As was spoken of one President “if he thought cannibalism would get him the votes he needs, he’d be fattening up a missionary in the White House right now.” I’m very disappointed with the Australian electorate and Amnesty’s honourable failure to at least the facts out about this into the broader media. In this case it’s from no lack of trying or any marketing mistakes that I can see. Sigh. I suppose we’ll just have to keep plugging away.
Marilyn Shepherd | Posted on 12 February 2012, 04:28AM | Report comment
Native white Australian’s? Give us a rest.
flaevo | Posted on 10 February 2012, 04:56PM | Report comment
Amnesty Int is complicit in the Genocide being enacted on the previously White majority Western countries. International law recognises the Indo European race. There are many ways to effect a Genocide on a group. Amnesty Int stands accused of encouraging the Genocide of the Native White Australians. Amnesty Int has been added to the list of people and organisations that will in the near future be charged with the crime of encouraging Genocide.
Marilyn Shepherd | Posted on 10 February 2012, 02:28AM | Report comment
When does the government just grow up and stop hurting innocent people in this way?
Surely 20 years of this failed lunacy is enough for any country.