Search results

This report is about two distinct subject matters. The first of these is the welcome move by the Australian Government to transfer increasing numbers of asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons into community arrangements. The second is the situation of people who remain in immigration detention facilities with little or no prospect of being released.[1]

Recommendation 2: The need to detain should be assessed on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration individual circumstances. That assessment should be conducted when a person is taken into immigration detention or as soon as possible thereafter. A person should only be held in a closed immigration detention facility if they are individually assessed as posing an unacceptable risk to the Australian community and that risk cannot be managed in a less restrictive way.

Until December 2009, Ali Jasmin lived with his family in Bala Uring, a small village on the island of Flores, Indonesia. His family bought fish from the local fishermen and sold them at the market. Ali had completed seven years of schooling and worked as a fisherman in a little town not far from his home.

Over recent months, the Australian Government has moved increasing numbers of asylum seekers and refugees who arrived in Australia by boat from closed immigration detention into the community, pending resolution of their claims for protection. This has been achieved through use of community detention and bridging visas, building on measures introduced by successive Australian Governments.[2]

This is my third Native Title Report as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner. This year I continue the theme from my previous Reports by focusing on land tenure and economic reform on Indigenous communal lands.1

Key findings of Review Given their age, most undergraduates enter ADFA without much ‘real world’ experience, with many having never lived away from home before. 1 The differing levels of maturity of undergraduates, combined with the pressures of living, working and studying together, can present substantial risk factors for ADFA. In particular, the Review findings indicated that: A number of ...

A note from the Commissioner New arrangements for Indigenous affairs New arrangements event timeline What are the new arrangements ? Walking with the women Race discrimination and shared responsibility agreements Getting more out of native title Agreement making guidelines Links to the new arrangements Where to from here?

[1] Adapted from Jackson S, Indigenous Interests and the National Water Initiative: Water Management, Reform and Implementation, Background Paper and Literature Review, Report for the IWPG (2007), p 42. At: http://www.nailsma.org.au/nailsma/publications/downloads/NAILSMA_NWI_Review_UPDATEDec07.pdf (viewed 17 December 2008).

At the international level there are three broad categories of obligation to which a state may be subject: treaty law, customary international law and emerging international standards. Treaty obligations become binding on states once they have ratified a treaty. This means that the state allows itself to be bound by the conditions and obligations contained within the treaty. Customary international law is enshrined in continuous practice by a majority of states over an extended period of time.

“In Australia, if you have a pet, you take your pet out at least once a week. I haven’t had an excursion in the two years I’ve been in detention ... I don’t even know what Australians look like.”

There are a host of benefits associated with community arrangements for asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons. Community arrangements are more closely aligned with international human rights law and standards than models of indefinite closed immigration detention. They also provide for far more humane treatment of people seeking protection.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Overview Committee (Queensland), 1996: First Report (Department of Families, Youth and Community Care, Brisbane).

Despite the significant positive developments of the past two years, the Commission remains seriously concerned about some aspects of Australian law and policy on asylum seekers, refugees and immigration detention. The Commission is primarily concerned about the prolonged or indefinite detention and lack of durable solutions or substantive visa pathways for certain groups of people in immigration detention. These include stateless persons; refugees who have received adverse security assessments; and refugees who are of interest to or have been charged by the Australian Federal Police (AFP).

Part II - THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND MULITCULTURAND AND INDIGENOUS AFFIARS (DIMIA) AND THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN DEPARMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES (DHS) RELATING TO CHILD PROTECTION NOTIFICATIONS AND CHILD WELFARE ISSUES PERTAINING TO CHILDREN IN IMMIGRATION DETENTION IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA