Irregular Maritime Migration and the Pacific Solution Mark II: Back to the Future for Refugee Law and Policy in Australia?
In: International Journal on Minority and Group RightsSearch for other papers by Peter Billings in
Current site
Google Scholar
Following a rise in the number of irregular maritime arrivals seeking refugee protection in Australia, and two successful legal challenges to their refugee processing policies, the Labor Government has resuscitated notorious aspects of the ‘Pacific Solution’ as part of a ‘no advantage’ policy. This strategy seeks to deter ‘irregular’ asylum seekers by treating them no more favourably than refugees seeking protection from overseas awaiting entry to Australia through regular refugee/humanitarian channels. In furtherance of this ‘no advantage’ policy, extra-territorial processing on Nauru and Papua New Guinea has been re-introduced and ‘excision’ provisions are to be extended to mainland Australia placing the continent outside of its ‘migration zone’ and, therefore, asylum seekers beyond the regular laws and processes for protection seekers. This article analyses the seismic shifts in asylum seeker policy that have occurred in Australia over the recent past and the politics underpinning them.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
8)
M. Grattan, ‘PM’s Pacific Solution Mark II’, The Age, 14 August 2012, <www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/pms-pacific-solution-mark-ii-20120813-24508.html>, visited on 27 November 2012. The analogy with past practices on Nauru and Manus Island is not entirely apposite (see below).
-
43)
K. Needham and D. Flitton, ‘Refugee Deal with Malaysia Clinched’, Sydney Morning Herald, 22 July 2011, p. 1, <www.smh.com.au/national/refugee-deal-with-malaysia-clinched-20110721-1hqzx.html>, visited 28 November 2012.
-
82)
C. Kenny, ‘Tragic Results of Labor’s Compassion’, The Australian, 27 December 2010, p. 12.
-
85)
A. Kirk, ‘UNHCR tells Government it won’t be involved in Pacific Solution Mark 2’, ABC News – The World Today, 24 August 2012, <www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3575073.htm>, visited on 27 November 2012.
-
108)
In April 2010, the processing of protection visa applications from Sri Lankan and Afghan asylum seekers was suspended for three and six months respectively: C. Evans, Changes to Australia’s immigration processing system, 9 April 2010 (Media Release), <www.minister.immi.gov.au/media/media-releases/2010/ce10029.htm>, visited on 28 November 2012. The suspension was lifted for both countries on 6 July and 30 September 2010 respectively.
-
109)
R. Carr, ‘Broadening the Scope of Historical Enquiry into Australian Refugee Policy’, Australian Policy and History (2010) p. 5 <http://aph.org.au/broadening-the-scope>, visited on 28 November 2012.
-
117)
A. Bainbridge, ‘Indefinite detention under High Court challenge’, Lateline, 23 May 2012, <www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3509667.htm>, visited on 27 November 2012.
-
132)
B. Nicholson and P. Taylor, ‘High Seas Error Turns Elation into Agony’ The Australian, 26 March 2013, p.2
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1075 | 129 | 10 |
| Full Text Views | 337 | 17 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 331 | 37 | 4 |
Irregular Maritime Migration and the Pacific Solution Mark II: Back to the Future for Refugee Law and Policy in Australia?
In: International Journal on Minority and Group RightsSearch for other papers by Peter Billings in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Following a rise in the number of irregular maritime arrivals seeking refugee protection in Australia, and two successful legal challenges to their refugee processing policies, the Labor Government has resuscitated notorious aspects of the ‘Pacific Solution’ as part of a ‘no advantage’ policy. This strategy seeks to deter ‘irregular’ asylum seekers by treating them no more favourably than refugees seeking protection from overseas awaiting entry to Australia through regular refugee/humanitarian channels. In furtherance of this ‘no advantage’ policy, extra-territorial processing on Nauru and Papua New Guinea has been re-introduced and ‘excision’ provisions are to be extended to mainland Australia placing the continent outside of its ‘migration zone’ and, therefore, asylum seekers beyond the regular laws and processes for protection seekers. This article analyses the seismic shifts in asylum seeker policy that have occurred in Australia over the recent past and the politics underpinning them.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1075 | 129 | 10 |
| Full Text Views | 337 | 17 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 331 | 37 | 4 |