New York:
The Australian government should reverse its decision to suspend the processing
of new asylum applications from Sri Lankan and Afghan nationals, Human Rights
Watch said in a letter to Immigration Minister Chris Evans today.
Human Rights Watch said that the new policy, announced on
April 8, 2010, fails to recognize the serious threats to security for certain
groups in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka and violates Australia’s obligations under
international law not to discriminate in the treatment of refugees.
“The Australian government shouldn’t cherry-pick among
nationalities when deciding whose refugee claims get heard,” said Elaine
Pearson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights
Watch. “Australiashould be setting a positive example for refugee protection in the region, not
undermining international standards.”
The Australian government said it would suspend new asylum
applications from Afghans for a period of six months and from Sri Lankans for a
period of three months, in an apparent effort to deter unauthorized arrivals by
boat.
Human Rights Watch said that the blanket suspension of all
applications from nationals of specific countries is discriminatory under the
1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, to which Australia is a
party. Even if human rights conditions have improved in a country of origin, Australiais still obligated to provide individuals with an opportunity to claim asylum
and to examine their refugee claims.
In the cases of Afghanistanand Sri Lanka,
however, Human Rights Watch’s research shows that human rights conditions are
far from stable or adequate, and that individuals and certain groups continue
to face significant threats and to lack effective protection. For instance,
women and girls, ethnic and religious minorities, media workers, civil society
activists, opposition party members and supporters, and alleged militants may
be at risk of persecution in Afghanistanand Sri Lanka.
In the letter, Human Rights Watch said the April 8
announcement about suspending asylum procedures alongside an announcement of
enhanced measures to stop the crime of “people smuggling” implied criminality
on the part of asylum seekers.
“Individuals under threat in Sri
Lanka and Afghanistansometimes have no choice but to turn to smugglers to escape persecution,”
Pearson said. “While smuggling is a crime, the Australian government seems to
confuse smuggling with asylum, tarring the victims with the stigma of crimes
committed against them.”
Human Rights Watch noted that in 2008 the then-new Labor
government initially made good on its election promises to protect the rights
of refugees. But over the past two years, the government has changed course.
Today, asylum seekers who arrive in Australiaby boat remain subjected to mandatory detention, Christmas
Island’s detention centers are again filled with asylum seekers,
and now newly arriving Afghan and Sri Lankan boat people, including children,
will be made to endure the hardship of additional months of detention,
regardless of the merits of their refugee claims.
“In the heat of an election year, the Rudd administration is
choosing politically expedient refugee bashing over the principles of refugee
protection,” Pearson said. “It is a sorry reflection on Australian public
opinion that the government thinks it must discriminate against Afghan and Sri
Lankan refugees in the hope of winning votes.”