Mandatory Detention Policy: A Comprehensive Analysis
Verified
Added on 2023/06/10
|8
|2037
|55
AI Summary
This article provides a detailed analysis of the public policy process of Australia's Mandatory Detention Policy. It covers the policy's agenda setting, formation, legitimation, implementation, evaluation, and maintenance. The article also discusses the amendments made to the policy over time and the arguments for and against it.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY Name of the Student Name of the University Author Note
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY Introduction Public policy is the way in which the government of any country keeps order in the country and fulfils the needs of the citizens of the country through different laws and regulations that are explained in the constitution of that country (Dunn, 2015). Public policies are present to address the needs of the people of the country and so these policies are divided into different categories based on sections of the society. For example, there are health policies which covers all the policies which are related to the health of the citizens and also educates them in case of any epidemic or new emergent diseases. There are also legal policies which takes care of all the laws and the determinants of what is to be called as a criminal activity and what punishments are to be handed out for which crimes. Based on the public policies, the state can evoke any action or contract that goes against the objectives of the public policy (Ehrenberg & Smith, 2016). Policy Process The public policy process is the way in which a public policy is formed, implemented and evaluated. Even though there are many individuals who have broken down the process into different phases, the most common procedure of public policy process has been broken down into six phases as mentioned below: Agenda Setting –This is the first phase of the cycle, where the policy makers decide on which problems are to be addressed. There are several topics which are discussed before the policy makers move forward with what to set as an agenda. The different kinds of agenda may be systematic agendas, institutional agendas, discretionary agendas and decision agendas (Birkland, 2015). The type of agenda is decided according to the importance of the issue and the authority of the policy makers in addressing that issue.
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY Formation of policy –This is the second phase of the cycle, where the solutions for different problems are argued and discussed. In this phase, different parties intensely negotiate with each other to give shape to a problem’s solution. They fight for their needs and desires, against each other (Hill & Varone, 2016). There different concerns that come to notice during this phase such as budgetary issues, political and personal constraints or the ways of protecting the existing programs. Hence, the formation of public policies is done my bargaining more than any other means. Legitimationofpolicy–Thewordlegitimacymeansthattheactionsofthe government is considered to be authoritative and legal by the public. To legitimize a public policy, the policy needs to be followed through a legislative process. Once the policy is legitimized, it becomes a law and hence can be implemented from thereon. However, a policy becomes legitimized in true sense when the public starts to accept it and act upon it (Hill, 2014). Therefore, the public has the right to reject a policy if they find that the policy is not acceptable to them. Implementation of policy –This is the fourth phase of the public policy process which determines that the policy has been put to action. After the policy has been implemented the responsibility of keeping track of the policy shifts from the policy makers to the policy implementer (Hill & Hupe, 2014). The policy can keep developing further even after it has been implemented. The success of a policy can be traced back to this phase as implementing the policy successfully is the main task. Evaluation of policy –After a policy have been implemented, the policy makes evaluate if the policy have been implemented properly and if it had been able to achieve the objectives that it had been set with. The policy makers evaluate and measure the outcomes of the policy and steer between the efficiency and the effectiveness of the
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY policy. The evaluation phase can even occur when the policy is being implemented or after it has been completely implemented (John, 2013). Maintenance,SuccessionorTerminationofPolicy–Oncethepolicyis implemented it is evaluated in intervals to understand their success or failure. Based on this the policy can be amended, continued or terminated (Gerston, 2014). Policy Process of Australia’s Mandatory Detention Policy The policy process of Australia’s Mandatory Detention Policy is as follows: Agenda Setting –The mandatory detention policy in Australia was introduced in the year 1992 by the Keating (Labor) Government. The policy states that is legally acceptable to detain all the non-citizens of Australia who are found without a valid visa in the country. This policy was set because of the intense arrival of Indochinese boats. The agenda for this policy was set as many unlawful non-citizens came into the country through boats and they could be a security risk to the country (Nethery & Gordyn, 2014). Hence it became mandatory for the government to segregate all the asylum seekers and make sure that the right people stayed in the country. Formation of the policy –The policy was introduced by the Keating Government with the support of bipartisan because of the unauthorised entry of Indochinese immigrants into the country. The government wanted to send a clear signal to the immigrants that even though they were able to enter the country, they might not be accepted in the community without proper legislation (Fleay & Briskman, 2013). Therefore, mandatory detention was arranged for all the unlawful citizens so that they could go through proper legal process before being allowed to stay in the country. The making of this policy received support from almost all parties of the government as everyone was against this unauthorised and unlawful arrival of non-citizens.
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY Legitimation of policy –The policy was legitimized with the enactment of the Migration Amendment Act of 1992. Since the policy have been accepted by both the government and the public, it did not take much time for the policy to be legitimized. The policy under the section 189, 196 and 198 of the Migration Act stated that all non-citizens who entered unlawfully in Australia will be detained and will be kept in the immigration detention process until they receive a visa or they have been removed from Australia permanently. The act even applies to the asylum seekers who arrive into the country to seek protection, the lawful non-citizens whose visa might have expired or the non-citizens whose visas were cancelled (Phillips & Spinks, 2013). Implementation of policy –The policy was implemented in 1992 and applied to the immigrants who arrived into the country between 19thNovember 1989 to 1stSeptember 1994, without any legal authority to enter or stay in Australia. The main concern for this act was to take measure for a specific class of people who are the unauthorised people who arrived via boat and hence the government wanted to have more control over the migration program (Newman, Proctor & Dudley, 2013). During the implementation there were some opposition from witnesses who said that the asylum seekers might try to flee persecution and hence this could lead to more lengthy detention periods. Evaluation of policy –Many changes have been done in the initial Migration Act over the time. Amendments were made in the policy with time depending on the success rate and the increase or decrease in the arrival of immigrants in the country. However, there were many arguments regarding the implementation of the policy which stated that even though the policy was said to be equally and uniformly applied to all unlawful entrants in the country, the main target for the government and this act remained those non-citizens who arrived by boat into the country (Torrey, 2014). Every government successor have
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY maintained the migration detention policy and have ensured the public that every unauthorised arrivals in the country came under this act, not just the boat people. Maintenance, Succession or Termination of Policy –The policy have come under many speculation but it had managed to in action as decided by the government. Even though there have been many arguments regarding the success of the policy, however, the government have been able to ensure the public about the importance and the success of the policy. There have been many amendments that have been made to the policy over time depending upon the changes in situation and the changes in the government and the change in the requirement of the public and the country, but there have been no reason to terminate it (Kagan, 2015). Conclusion Hence it can be deduced from the above report that the Mandatory Detention Policy is a very important public policy that have been formed for the safeguarding of the public and the country Australia. Even though the policy has gone through many changes but the need for the policy have been evident since the policy have not suffered any termination request from the public or from the government.
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY References: Birkland, T. A. (2015).An introduction to the policy process: Theories, concepts, and models of public policy making. Routledge. Dunn, W. N. (2015).Public policy analysis. Routledge. Ehrenberg, R. G., & Smith, R. S. (2016).Modern labor economics: Theory and public policy. Routledge. Fleay, C., & Briskman, L. (2013). Hidden men: Bearing witness to mandatory detention in Australia.Refugee Survey Quarterly,32(3), 112-129. Gerston, L. N. (2014).Public policy making: Process and principles. Routledge. Hill, M. (2014).Policy process: A reader. Routledge. Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2014).Implementing public policy: An introduction to the study of operational governance. Sage. Hill, M., & Varone, F. (2016).The public policy process. Routledge. John, P. (2013).Analyzing public policy. Routledge. Kagan, M. (2015). Immigration Law's Looming Fourth Amendment Problem.Geo. LJ,104, 125. Nethery, A., & Gordyn, C. (2014). Australia–Indonesia cooperation on asylum-seekers: a caseof‘incentivisedpolicytransfer’.AustralianJournalofInternational Affairs,68(2), 177-193.
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
MANDATORY DETENTION POLICY Newman, L., Proctor, N., & Dudley, M. (2013). Seeking asylum in Australia: immigration detention, human rights and mental health care.Australasian Psychiatry,21(4), 315- 320. Phillips, J., & Spinks, H. (2013).Boat arrivals in Australia since 1976. Parliament of Australia, Department of Parliamentary Services, Parliamentary Library. Torrey, P. L. (2014). Rethinking Immigration's Mandatory Detention Regime: Politics, Profit, and the Meaning of Custody.U. Mich. JL Reform,48, 879.