Refugee Law: Australia's Treatment of Migrants and Refugees Report

This report examines Australia's migration law, focusing on the treatment of refugees and migrants. It explores Australia's history of accepting refugees, its participation in the UN refugee agency's resettlement program, and the challenges it faces regarding immigration and asylum seekers. The report analyzes the case of Bakhtiyari & Bakhtiyari v Australia, highlighting the legal distinctions between refugees and immigrants and the ethical considerations in refugee protection. It discusses the Refugee Council of Australia's initiatives to support refugees and concludes by evaluating the fairness of Australia's migration policies, considering whether migrants are treated better than refugees. The report utilizes case laws and websites to support its arguments and analysis.

Running head: MIGRATION LAW
Migration Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1MIGRATION LAW
One of the biggest issue of Australia is protecting its borders. Australian has a
history of accepting refugees for resetting them which has led to the resettlement of around
800,000 refugees since 19451. With every year the number of asylum seekers and refugees
are increasing who is not only seeking asylum but are also in need of humanitarian assistance,
thereby posing a great challenge to certain advanced countries in the world. Australia is one
of the few countries that face challenges regarding immigration, refugee issues, and Asylum
seekers, along with illegal immigration problems. Therefore it response to such challenges by
participating in the United Nations refugee agency's resettlement program which directs the
member states to accept a limited number of refugees every year.
By maintaining a highly managed migration system, Australia has been accepting
around 13000 refuses every year by way of its humanitarian program2. The majority of the
financial grants that Australia receives from various international bodies goes to refugees
who are referred by UN or has been a victim of Human rights abuse overseas in a country
that is close tie with Australia. However it is evident that the UN refugee agency’s
resettlement program only helps a small portion of the global refugees, while the rest remains
in their home country. Australia grants visas to a very small portion of the total number of
refugees accepted by Australia which is around 17 to 20%3.
After the refugees are resettled in Australia, most of them who were farmers in their
home country, wish to continue farming in Australia as well, however that becomes a
problem due to the issues to get access to farmland4. Organisations like the refugee Council
1 "Asylum Seekers And Refugees: What Are The Facts? – Parliament Of Australia", Aph.Gov.Au (Webpage,
2019) <https://www.aph.gov.au/about_parliament/parliamentary_departments/parliamentary_library/pubs/rp/
rp1415/asylumfacts>.
2 "Refugees: Australia’S Humanitarian Response – Parliament Of Australia", Aph.Gov.Au (Webpage, 2019)
<https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/
BriefingBook43p/refugees>.
3 Ibid.
4 "Supporting Refugee Farming Initiatives In Rural And Regional Australia", Refugee Council Of Australia
(Webpage, 2019) <https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/refugee-farming-initiatives/>.

2MIGRATION LAW
of Australia aims to help the refugees to form and grow crops, not only to help them but to
contribute to the community as well5.
A case that demarcates between refugee and immigrant is the case of Bakhtiyari &
Bakhtiyari v Australia (HRC 2003) where a family of Hazara detained who had come to
Australia from Afghanistan for seeking Asylum due to an undetermined claim for Afghan
dominion6, Australia did not pay attention to the credibility of the family to be an Afghan.
The family was detained as soon as they arrived in Australia. In this regard the Human rights
Commission appeal before Australia to cancel the deportation of the family. Human rights
Commission held that Australia decision to detail the family for such a long time is arbitrary
and it should be marked as beyond judicial review. It was also added that the action of
Australia in regard to detaining the family was not as per the ‘best interest of the children'.
The Australian government was redirected to fair compensation for violation of human rights
to the victims however Australia deported the family to Pakistan without paying
compensation in 2004.
Therefore a mixed review could be stated in terms of the comment that Australia
treats immigrants better than refugees as immigrants are legal while refugees are illegal. In
several cases it could be seen that Australia has been in partial towards refugee settlement by
offering an extremely less proportion of visas to refugees every year on the other hand it has
organisations that help up the refugees to set up their own farming business. Thereby it
cannot be said with certainty that immigrants are treated better than refugees.
5 Ibid.
6 Bakhtiyari & Bakhtiyari v Australia (HRC 2003)

3MIGRATION LAW
References
Case laws
Bakhtiyari & Bakhtiyari v Australia (HRC 2003)
Websites
"Asylum Seekers And Refugees: What Are The Facts? – Parliament Of Australia",
Aph.Gov.Au (Webpage, 2019)
<https://www.aph.gov.au/about_parliament/parliamentary_departments/
parliamentary_library/pubs/rp/rp1415/asylumfacts>
"Refugees: Australia’S Humanitarian Response – Parliament Of Australia", Aph.Gov.Au
(Webpage, 2019)
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/
Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook43p/refugees
"Supporting Refugee Farming Initiatives In Rural And Regional Australia", Refugee Council
Of Australia (Webpage, 2019) https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/refugee-farming-
initiatives/