Search results

This submission will focus on the current Australian immigration detention regime as it applies to minors. The regime will be examined based on data and information made available by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (“DIMIA”) and supporting documentation ranging from government publications, the Flood Inquiry and testimonies given to the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission “HREOC” under oath.

This report draws upon the extensive work the Australian Human Rights Commission has undertaken in the area of Australian law, policy and practice relating to asylum seekers, refugees and immigration detention. The Commission’s work has included conducting national inquiries, examining proposed legislation, monitoring and reporting on immigration detention, and investigating complaints from ...

This paper contains a comparison of the policies and procedures of Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada for dealing with children as asylum seekers. This comparison reveals two main differences.

Pursuant to section 11(1)(f)(ii) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth), I attach a report of my inquiry into a complaint by Mr Zacharias Manongga Consul for the Northern Territory, consul of the Republic of Indonesia that the human rights of Indonesian Fishers detained on vessels in Darwin Harbour were breached by the Commonwealth of Australia.

The Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) public statement on Immigration Detention at Villawood.

1.1 Background to this report 1.2 Compliance with human rights obligations 1.3 Conduct of visits 1.4 Overview of immigration detention facilities 1.5 Response by Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

As discussed in Chapter 1, Australia’s international human rights obligations require that individuals who say that they are children be given the benefit of the doubt and treated as minors unless there is proof to the contrary. In the case of unaccompanied children, this should lead to consideration by the State of what steps need to be taken to ensure their special protection and care.

Refugee Advice Casework Service (RACS) is a Community Legal Service which provides free legal advice and representation to asylum seekers in the community and detention in Australia.

Recommendation 1: The Migration Act 1958 (Cth), and if appropriate the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), should be amended to make clear that for the purposes of Part 2, Division 12, Subdivision A of the Migration Act, an individual who claims to be under the age of 18 years must be deemed to be a minor unless the relevant decision-maker is positively satisfied, or in the case of a judicial decision-maker, satisfied on the balance of probabilities after taking into account the matters identified in s 140(2) of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), that the individual is over the age of 18 years.

Comments on Transcripts of the Public hearings for DIMIA and ACM by Philippa Goodwin, Deputy Secretary DIMIA Comments on Transcript of the Public Hearing held in Sydney on 2 December 2002 Comments on Transcript of the Public Hearing held in Sydney on 3 December 2002 Comments on Transcript of the Public Hearing held in Sydney on 4 December 2002 Comments on Transcript of the Public Hearing held in ...

Pursuant to section 11(1)(f) and 20(1) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth), I attach a report of my inquiry into a complaint against the Commonwealth of Australia (Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) and GSL (Australia) Pty Ltd. I have found that acts done on behalf of the Commonwealth were contrary to the human rights of the complainant as provided for in articles 7 and 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

This year marks the twentieth anniversary of Australia’s introduction of mandatory immigration detention and the eighteenth anniversary of the system of mandatory, indefinite immigration detention. In the current context, it is apt to recall that mandatory detention was introduced in reaction to the arrival of asylum seekers by boat, with concerns about a potential ‘influx’ spurring bipartisan support for increasingly tough measures on persons who arrived in Australia without a visa.[8]