ASYLUM-Australia: Advocacy Brief on Manus and Nauru Detention Issues

This advocacy brief by ASYLUM-Australia critically analyzes the Australian government's offshore processing policies and the detention of asylum seekers on Manus and Nauru Islands. The report highlights the poor conditions, human rights violations, and instances of sexual abuse experienced by detainees. It examines the legal and ethical implications of these policies, including contraventions of the Refugee Convention and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The brief provides detailed recommendations, including ending immigration detention, ensuring human rights protection, investigating reports of assault, and providing access to basic socio-economic rights for asylum seekers. The report calls for immediate action to address the systemic issues and protect the vulnerable populations affected by these policies, advocating for the closure of detention centers and the processing of asylum claims in accordance with international law.

Advocacy Brief by ASYLUM-Australia NGO
ANALYSIS and RECOMMENDATIONS
Issues Related to Australian Policy Regarding the Detention on Manus and Nauru Islands
Detention on Nauru and Manus Island
A central feature of Australia’s asylum policy is the practice of off-shore processing of
refugee claims, in a deal negotiated with the Pacific States of Nauru and Papua New Guinea
(PNG). This policy was revived in September 2012, where the first group of asylum seekers
were sent from Australia to Nauru and Manus Island, Papua New Guinea for processing
(Fleay & Hoffman, 2014). The strategic aim of the Australian government is to provide a
deterrent to the increasing number of asylum seekers who reach Australia by boat. Conditions
in immigration detention in the Island are poor, with the first asylum-seekers who arrived on
Nauru being accommodated in large tents with up to 30 people, metal containers that housed
15 people later replaced the tents (Fleay & Hoffman, 2014). The policy has been advocated in
terms of saving people from drowning at sea, providing a rhetoric of humaneness alongside a
tough approach on asylum to the Australian voter (Cuttitta, 2014).
Australia’s policy rhetoric creates a distinction between the ‘good refugee’ who waits in a
refugee camp in a Third World country for resettlement in a Western country and the ‘bad
refugee’ who attempts to circumvent this process by travelling to Australia boat without an
entry visa (McAdam, 2013). Resettlement from refugee camps however is offered to only
about 1% of refugees annually leaving the majority with little or no change of this form of
international protection. While Australian politicians have also argued that asylum seekers
should seek protection closer to home, international law does not require a refugee to seek
asylum in the first country they reach; geography dictates that many individuals will need to
pass through non-Refugee Convention states to reach Australia (McAdam, 2013).
Australian’s asylum policy is referred to as the ‘Pacific Solution’ included opening
processing centres on Nauru and PNG, hoping that poor conditions would deter asylum
seeker from boarding boats in the first place. This failed to work since it took not account of
the reasons why people leave their homes and seek asylum in the first place (McAdam,
2013).
Recommendations

 ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the Government of Australia to put an end to
immigration detention which is in contravention of the Convention Relating to the
Status of Refugees 1951 (Refugee Convention). Article 31 requires that asylum seeker
not be subjected to penalties, including detention, prior to status determination and
once status determination is determined. Australia should abide by its obligations
under the Refugee Convention. Detention must only be carried out in accordance with Article 9 standards of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 (ICCPR) which means it
must be lawful and non-arbitrary (Costello, 2015). The principle of proportionality should be applied in addition to reasonableness and
necessity for detention. The Human Rights Committee (HRC) has made clear that for
immigration detention purposes, illegal entry alone does not justify detention (A v
Australia Communication No 560/1993 (HRC, 30 April 1997), para 9.2.) ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the Government of Australia to take account of the
HRCs repeated condemnation of Australia’s detention practices and failure to
provide individual justification (Danyal Shafiq v Australia, 2006).
Sexual Abuse of Women and Children on Nauru
Reports of widespread sexual abuse of women on Nauru include being routinely raped,
abused both in detention and while living in the community on Nauru. Despite instances of
serious abuse and sexual assault, the police on the Island have failed to take any measures to
prosecute the offenders, or even attempt to register the assault (Bacon, Curr, Lawrence,
Macken, & O’Connor, 2016). Women and children in the detention centres have reported
widespread sexual assault and abuse. Assaults have been reported inside the detention centres
by both the Security staff and local men, as well as women living outside the camp in the
local community with evidence of patterns of systematic rape and abuse (Bacon et al., 2016).
Children on Nauru are severely traumatised, giving rise to incidents of self-harm, and have
experienced sexual abuse from guards in the camp (Farrell, Evershed, & Davidson, 2016).
Many women have become pregnant through rape on Nauru and require urgent medical
attention that is not available on Nauru. The Australian Woman in Support of Women on
Nauru (AWSWN) attempted to gain access to the women on Nauru, but the Nauruan
government have prohibited foreign journalists from entering the island (Fox, 2015). Many

young women have travelled to Australia alone, often with young children seeking asylum
and safety in Australia, children are also being detained and exposed to sexual assault.
Wilson Security, who guard the detention centre who are paid for their protection, often carry
out the abuse, it is alleged that a guard told an asylum seeker who had been sexually assaulted
in the camp that there is no criminal penalty for rape in Australia and that rape is a common
occurrence (Farrell et al., 2016).
Recommendations
 ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the Australian government to offer women and
children immediate protection from sexual abuse and rape on Nauru.
 ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the Australian government to immediately end the
dangerous conditions of detention for women and children on Nauru and remove the
risk of systematic sexual abuse living in the community on Nauru.
 ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the Government of Nauru to immediately allow access
of foreign journalists onto the Island of Nauru and to provide protection and the basic
human rights of women on the Island to be free from sexual abuse and other forms of
gender-based violence.
 All women and children on the Island should be granted immediate access to medical
and health care, in accordance with the right to the highest attainable standard of
health provided for in Article 12 International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights 1966
 Asylum processing and detention on Nauru should be ended and all asylum seekers or
refugees brought to Australia for processing or for resettlement.
Men Detained on Manus Island
Between July 2013 and October 2018, 1,523 men have been sent to Manus Island as part of
Australia’s policy of offshore processing, as of October 2018, 626 were still reported to be on
PNG. As with the women on Nauru, all governments involved have gone to extreme lengths
to supress information being revealed outside of the Islands about the conditions of detention
on the Islands (Refugee Council Australia & Amnesty International, 2018). The men on
Manus were placed in conditions of prolonged and indefinite detention, leading to three
suicides amongst the men since August 2017. The Regional Processing Centre (RPC) on

Manus Island, closed, after being found unconstitutional by the PNG Supreme Court in April
2016 leaving asylum seekers on Manus Island with very little access to health care,
increasingly difficult for refuges in PNG to be transferred out to Australia for medical care.
Despite the closure of the RPC very little changes for detainees and access to many of the
facilities within the RPC were removed (Refugee Council Australia & Amnesty International,
2018).
Upon closure of the RPC, many men were threatened and beaten with metal batons by the
security forces to force them out. The men were attacked and removed by force to another
prison camp, with all their possessions being destroyed. Many now fear for their safety from
the local community. The refugees put additional pressure on the already limited facilities on
the Island, leading to resentment in local communities (Refugee Council Australia &
Amnesty International, 2018). Australia’s pursuit of its “stop the boats” policy has been to
intercept asylum seekers travelling by boat from Indonesia to Australia, then transferred them
to Manus Island where they have been left for years with no indication of whether they would
ever be granted asylum (Isaacs, 2018).
The detainees were forced out of the RPC after years of detention there, many who have fled
wars and persecution have been placed in danger again by the Australian Government.
Outside of the RPC, many asylum seekers are now subjected to serious violence by the local
residents of the Island (Isaacs, 2018). While the Australian Government have place many
vulnerable asylum seekers in refugees on Manus Islands, they have made no attempt to
monitor or to ensure their safety. The only options that detainees have been given to leave
Manus Island is as voluntary returnees to their country of origin, many who have been killed
when returned to places like Afghanistan by the Taliban (Isaacs, 2018).
Recommendations
 ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the Australian government to end immigration
detention and offshore processing immediately and bring all those detained on Manus
to Australian for appropriate processing of their refugee claims in accordance with
the Refugee Convention and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (Article 14). Ensure adequate human rights protection including security and health care rights
for all asylum seekers on Manus Island.

 ASYLUM-Australia calls upon the PNG government to investigate reports of assault
against asylum seekers and refugees on the Island. Provide immediate protection and security for asylum seekers located on Manus
Island. Provide refugees travel documentation that will enable them to leave the Island if they
choose to do so. Provide refugees and asylum seekers access to basic socio-economic rights, including
the right to work, education and to an adequate standard of living, under Articles 6,7
11, 12 and 13 of the ICESCR.

Bibliography
A v Australia Communication No 560/1993 (HRC, 30 April 1997)
Bacon, W., Curr, P., Lawrence, C., Macken, J., & O’Connor, C. (2016). Protection Denied
Abuse Condoned: Women on Nauru at Risk.
Costello, C. (2015). The Human Rights of Migrants and Refugees in European Law. Oxford
University Press.
Cuttitta, P. (2014). Borderizing the Island. Setting and Narratives of the Lampedusa Border
Play. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 13(2), 196–219.
Danyal Shafiq v. Australia, Communication No. 1324/2004, U.N. Doc.
CCPR/C/88/D/1324/2004 (2006).
Universal Declaration on Human Rights 1946
Farrell, P., Evershed, N., & Davidson, H. (2016, August 10). The Nauru files: cache of 2,000
leaked reports reveal scale of abuse of children in Australian offshore detention. The
Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/aug/10/the-
nauru-files-2000-leaked-reports-reveal-scale-of-abuse-of-children-in-australian-offshore-
detention [accessed 23rd March 2019]
Fleay, C., & Hoffman, S. (2014). Despair as a Governing Strategy: Australia and the
Offshore Processing of Asylum-Seekers on Nauru. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 33(2), 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1093/rsq/hdu004 [accessed 23rd March 2019]
Fox, L. (2015, October 29). Nauruan minister accuses Australian media of “great arrogance.”
ABC News. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-29/nauru-rejects-calls-for-
greater-access-for-australian-media/6895174 [accessed 23rd March 2019]
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966
Isaacs, M. (2018, April 30). There’s No Escape From Australia’s Refugee Gulag. Retrieved
March 23, 2019, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/30/theres-no-escape-from-
australias-refugee-gulag/ [accessed 23rd March 2019]
McAdam, J. (2013). Australia and Asylum Seekers. International Journal of Refugee Law,
25(3), 435–448.
Refugee Council Australia, & Amnesty International. (2018). Until When? The Forgotten
Men on Manus Island. Surry Hills, NSW: Refugee Council of Australia and Amnesty
International Australia.
United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951