Marie
8 September 2008, 05:19PM

(Part 1)
The Christmas Island Detention Centre was bullied through Parliament by an Australia Prime Minister (Howard), endorsed by our new P M, paid for by Australian taxpayers. Do we want to be part of such an abomination? Do we support a maximum-security prison for men, women and children? Or will we say, with one voice, Not in my name?

In 2005, Howard was reminded by his backbenchers of his promise – no more children in detention. Guess what? In the CIDC there are 800 beds for men, women and children.  It has an eight-bed nursery, a childcare centre, play area and classrooms.

How about the Gulag into its exact opposite. We could create a haven from a hellhole by turning that 800-bed prison into a community. No walls, no electronic bracelets, no guards, no Reds One and Two. No electronic connection to Big Brother

Marie
8 September 2008, 05:18PM

(Part 2)
In this scenario the walls would be brought down. The asylum seekers would have a home; they could work in the community; belong. They’d have money and, as the island has an airstrip, if they, at some future time, wanted to fly to their homeland, there’d be nothing to stop them.

Cancelling the obscenely expensive detention services contract with the American company, Global Solutions Ltd and dispensing with the no-longer-needed 24/7 TV surveillance monitors would provide suitable quarters plus staff for the hospital.

But,’ – I hear a voice – ‘every refugee would want to go there.’ True, and there’s only room for 800, but there are other islands in the Zone – 4,599 of them. Pick one or more and we could build other havens.

Emma
29 August 2008, 09:28PM

Thankyou so much Richard & James!!
God bless you! ^_^

James
29 August 2008, 11:30AM

Hi Emma,

Richard from the Amnesty International Australia refugee team has kindly put together some sources below; thanks Richard!

Firstly, a good one to mention is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 9: “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile”.

For a comprehensive examination of all the human rights issues involved in the detention of migrants and refugees, look at Amnesty International’s report “Migration-Related Detention: A research guide on human rights standards relevant to the detention of migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees” (2007).....

James
29 August 2008, 11:29AM

It’s a long report and you probably wouldn’t read all of it, but it contains plenty of information on treaties and declarations that relate to detention, and the particular standards that must be adhered to regarding presumption against, restrictions on, and conditions of detention. The report is accessible here: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/POL33/005/2007/en/f07d6dce-ad6b-11dc-a4b5-ef6c4a573348/pol330052007eng.pdf

For an Australian perspective, you could check out HREOC’s “Summary of Observations following the Inspection of Mainland Immigration Detention Facilities, 2007”, which lays out HREOC’s assessment of, and recommendations about, Australia’s detention centres. Available here: http://www.humanrights.gov.au/human_rights/immigration/idc2007.html#3

We hope that helps Emma!

James
29 August 2008, 11:25AM

For an Australian perspective, you could check out HREOC’s “Summary of Observations following the Inspection of Mainland Immigration Detention Facilities, 2007”, which lays out HREOC’s assessment of, and recommendations about, Australia’s detention centres. Available here: http://www.humanrights.gov.au/human_rights/immigration/idc2007.html#3

We hope that helps Emma!

1 human being 2 another
27 August 2008, 05:18PM

(Third part)

It would be informative to hear Nev’s viewpoint of the island itself, its commerce etc., as well as what info he has on the Papuans left on Christmas Island. With a total area of 135 sq. km, it’s hard to imagine people wanting to escape and live on the island.

Sources:
1. faq.visapro.com/H2A-Visa-FAQ2.asp#Q1
2. www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/us/26raid.html
3. www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2001/s422692.htm
4. www.smh.com.au/news/national/pacific-solution-cost-1b/2007/08/24/1187462523594.html
5. www.marpac.net/completed.htm (Acacia Court. 98-unit complex for $6 million)

1 human being 2 another
27 August 2008, 05:16PM

Thank you Amnesty for the good work you do.

To speak from the U.S. perspective, the U.S. government does indeed turn a blind eye to illegal immigrants—when it suits them. There’s also legitimacy through programs such as the H2A Guestworker Program (1), which I can’t speak of the pros or cons, seem to be both. They also arrest people when it suits them (2). Point being they maintain control. This allows the duplicity of Bush’s immigration policy to continue, i.e. building more walls along Mexico and speaking against immigration, while granting certain people access. Duplicity. Double-speak. Call it what you want, they moderate to their benefit first, not the benefit or safety of the people.
(cont.)

1 human being 2 another
27 August 2008, 05:15PM

This control falls in-line with P.M. Howard’s dictum “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.” (3) Since the island facility costs an exorbitant rate compared to mainland likenesses, 8-times the amount (4), it leaves me wondering why such a facility exists. I think this is an important question. One doesn’t spend $400-$500 million dollars to hold less than 800 legitimate immigrants. Just think about that amount. It’s sort of a bizarre amount. You can build a football stadium for less. A comparable apartment complex would cost 10-times less (5). Even if it is legitimate, from an economic standpoint the “circumstances in which they come” part is clearly not working. And if P.M. Rudd closed down the Manus Island and Naura facilities, why was Christmas Island not closed, and even more a new facility built?
(cont.)

Emma
27 August 2008, 03:36PM

(Me again)
I forgot to add:
What bugs me most (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that these people don’t get the opportunities we can take for granted. It sounds like they’re missing out on so much, like being able to raise a family, settle down, travel the world, work towards a job or goal, chase after a dream, etc. I like to believe that we all have a purpose and all make a difference during our time on earth, and I can’t help but wonder how someone can do that while they’re being detained.
It all just seems so unfair that, after the courage it takes to get here, they’re still deprived of that freedom and right to fulfill their lives.
I kind of get why people believe detaining them is right, but it just seems so cruel that someone who could make a difference, whether it be to one life, or one thousand, must be kept locked up…

Emma
27 August 2008, 03:17PM

For the sake of my school geography assignment, I’m having a little trouble pinpointing the human rights being violated in detention centres in Australia such as this one.
If anyone could perhaps point me in the direction of a treaty or declaration I should look at, I’d be really grateful!

Sarah
26 August 2008, 01:58PM

How long do people stay in the detention centre?

What do they have in the way of education, does anyone know?

I wish everyone would realize that each refugee is a vulnerable person in need, not a criminal or ‘terrorist’.

Stephen Langford
23 August 2008, 10:22AM

Tom has got it wrong… people coming here as asylum seekers are not coming here illegally. Let’s not let this toxic Howard-speak (often mouthed by good people) go unchallenged. And well done AI in going for the sinister Chrismas Island detention centre. Does anyone know why Labor started locking up asylum seekers in 1994? It was because of Gareth Evans’ push on Cambodia… he wanted to send a message to the (then) Cambodian asylum seekers. Monstrous then, it has grown into this much bigger monster. And all because of then foreign minister, Evans’ ambition. Nothing to do with security, just ambition. Disgusting.

Tom
21 August 2008, 11:42AM

One PS regarding Nev’s comments; I genuinely don’t believe that an ‘open’ refugee policy would result in a population explosion. Our geographical isolation means that only people with ‘means’ and determination are able to get here. If you look at illegal arrivals over the past thirty years we are talking about a few thousand people - even when Australia’s policy was less draconian.

The great irony is that the actual process of getting illegally to Australia as a refugee is a pretty sound selection process in itself. Only people with great determination and courage are likely to attempt it. They are often educated middle class (having the means and contacts to organise the journey) so find it easier to adapt to our social and work structures. The downside is of course that the poor and desperate are generally left behind in one of the many gigantic refugee camps, waiting for the UN to get to them.

Tom Gutteridge
21 August 2008, 11:27AM

I agree with Mark. There is a real problem with the immmediate polarisation of ‘opinions’ in such blogs. Actually Nev’s comments seem to me to be extremely reasonably put and in the spirit of open debate. Whether you agree with him is entirely up to you, but going on the attack just makes people’s comments sound defensive and unsure of their facts.

Personally I believe that there should be an open door policy for refugees, however that still involves identifying, interviewing, checking people’s health and so on. So of course people need to be ‘processed’ in some way as they arrive. And Nev is right that not separating violent people (whether mentally ill or otherwise) from other arrivals is hardly conducive to an atmosphere of peaceful recovery from trauma.

Mark
21 August 2008, 10:17AM

Thank you all for all of your comments but there is nothing to be gained from name calling. Mark (Amnesty System Admin).

Jesse
21 August 2008, 02:30AM

At Nev, maybe if you actually read the article correctly, rather than just slagging off Amnesty. They clearly state that the bottom 2 images (which includes the razor wire) are from the perth detention centre. They were never misleading in any way. It just shows what stupidity can come out of someones mouth when they don’t absorb all the information. Not to say that you are a stupid person, i have absolutly no idea of that. But right now, you are saying stupid things. And to finish. No one has mentioned an open border policy except for you. I think i speak for all when i say that refugees and immigrants do need to be processed before integrating into our society. But to treat them as a criminal and lock them behind bars while we do process them? that is just disgracful.

Daniel Miller
20 August 2008, 07:22PM

I often wonder how can some people sleep at night knowing that they deliberatly make another person/persons life miserable.
Well then again maybe saying deliberatly is to harsh as far as this new detention centure goes because not all refugees are good but then again they are not all bad, like most things in life it is niether black nor white it is just gray.
But then again whatever happened to logic,reason,sincerity and love?.
My point in all this is if people think before they act then I don’t think the world would be as messed up as it is.
To finish I don’t agree with detention centurs because I think that they are redicules for reasons thay I have already said but I do beleave in Amnesty and what it stands for.

Jason Sergeant
20 August 2008, 06:36PM

The people that really want to make a difference on this issue rather than just whinge and oppose(no matter how good the intentions) need to come up with real alternative solutions that can be taken seriously and afforded.

Anything that involves border control will have an element that someone can take issue with no matter how good the staff is or how low the fences are.

If the staff are good (people in these centers are not to be treated as criminals but aliens(not the ufo kind)) and if the turnaround is fast then i can’t take issue with it.

Nev
20 August 2008, 06:14PM

Oh dear, Greg am I really a redneck?