Australia stands alone internationally in perpetrating this injustice. The Migration Litigation Reform Act 2005 (Cth) excludes asylum seekers from their legal rights. It grants the Court the ability to deliver judgment on any issue, including the case as a whole, if they believe it has no reasonable grounds for success. This may seem reasonable, however the definition of ‘no reasonable grounds for success’ is as follows: For the purposes of [these sections], a defence or a proceeding or part of a proceeding need not be: (a) hopeless; or (b) bound to fail; for it to have no reasonable prospect of
This is sadly, a true and not uncommon tale. As she approaches shore, neither she nor her family could have anticipated the despair, the disillusion, the self-harm, and the attempted suicides that await those whom seek refuge in Australia. But all this is a result of the brutality of Australia’s current policy. Many argue the fact that asylum seekers are “queue jumpers” and “illegal immigrants”. This is not the case and cannot be the case.
Evidence of the latter is seen in both parties already claiming credit for the policy breakthrough. But there are significant issues not addressed, and significant opportunities missed. The recommendations do not assist asylum-seekers in countries where Australia has no immigration staff. Asylum-seekers from Afghanistan and Pakistan, two of the largest sources of refugees, have no formal channels to seek asylum, no queues to jump. Immigration protocols in other countries also need overhauling, to provide streamlined assistance with clear criteria, priorities and timelines.
This camp site looks really old and dirty. It seems to me that it is not looked after well. e) Do you think this letter would be considered appropriate in Australia today? Why? I think that this letter would not be appropriate in Australia today as were not in an era were racism is tolerated and we don’t judge people on where their parents were born.
The problem is that Malaysia has not signed with any of the UN’s conventions, and therefore the asylum seeker that may be sent over to that country may not be able to live in conditions that follow what rights they own. The national director of Amnesty International Australia told the Sydney Morning Herald that in Malaysia ‘asylum seekers die of disease in detention,’ and they had ‘evidence of people who are fleeing torture being beaten with sticks, including women.’ This incident goes against human rights against torture. The Convention against Torture (CAT) acknowledges this right by stating that torture is ‘any act by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person… when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.’ The Universal Declaration of Human Rights also recognizes the rights of human beings and Article 5 stresses, ‘that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,’ allowing humans to live with dignity. A glass ceiling is a metaphor used to describe a barrier within a workforce which separate women and men. Although it is not made obvious to anyone, it can be clearly seen with statistics, showing the difference in pay between the different genders.
As a result, immigration policy has lost its independent polity agenda. [Therefore,] virtually no new immigration policies have been created separated from terrorism policies since 2001.” Particularly, illegal immigration has overlapped with growing concerns about national security. The first official immigration initiative by the US government since 9/11 was the enactment of the Real ID Act in 2005. This new legislation required that drivers’ licenses issued by states had to conform to national standards, thereby making it difficult for illegal immigrant s from obtaining the licenses without having to prove their legal status and residency in the US. This legislation, however, proved to have many loopholes around it for illegal immigrants to obtain drivers’ licenses regardless of their illegal status because the states were not obliged to conform to the standards.
After all, genocide was already forbidden under customary international law at the time that the Aboriginals Ordinance was enacted. The court, however, found difficulty here as well, this time based on problems inherent in the definition of genocide as a crime. According to the court, the transfer that the Aboriginals Ordinance authorized lacked the requisite mental element of "intent to destroy" the children's racial or ethnic group. Rather, the court held that the forcible transfers authorized by the Ordinance were intended "for the good and welfare" of the aboriginal population. The court based this interpretation on the conditions that prevailed at the time of the Ordinance's passage.
They are not here un illegally! We are participants to the United Nations Refugee Convention which means that it is legal to seek asylum in Australia, despite the fact if you arrive by boat without a visa. Asylum seekers are perceived as ‘illegal immigrants' because politicians have made it seem so. By keeping the asylum seekers captive in detention centres, we let the public pass judgement on them, assuming that their prisoners who need to be caged up because they have committed an offense. By terminating mandatory detention and the misinterpretation of refugees in the community, the world would be a better place and Australians would actually be proud of who they are and what they stand for.
I do NOT support public nuisance street hookers being legal unless in special zones. But PRIVATE consenting adult sexwork should be legal as it is in most of the world except the U.S. Australia - Prostitution itself is legal but laws vary in different states regarding street soliciting and brothels. Brazil - Legal except brothels and pimping. In 2002 the Ministry of Labor added "sex worker" to an official list of occupations. Prostitution is not regulated in any way (no licensing) but prostitutes can contribute can contribute to the official government pension fund and receive benefits when they retire.
Regarding the latter, problems arise if they have no house where they can be formally registered, live in illegal settlements or do not have a place to live at all. Although not specifically targeted to as a group by the registration requirement, internal migrants will not be able to fulfil the requirement for local registration and they will not have access to public housing. This situation will lead to a paradoxical situation - a catch 22 - which causes a never-ending dilemma for internal migrants unless the governments are willing to do