Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

High Court challenge: Malaysia is not the solution for asylum seekers

By Jo Coghlan - posted Wednesday, 17 August 2011


The Gillard government's response has been that the High Court is not empowered to determine Ministerial 'declarations'. 'Declarations' are considered by the Gillard government to be outside of the High Court's purview. 'Declarations' in this sense means the Minister has made claims about human rights conditions in Malaysia that are not subjected to interpretations by the High Court because they have not been legislated nor are related to matters pertaining to the Constitution. As refugee advocate Frank Brennan has argued, until the current High Court injunction it was assumed "that the Minister could make such a declaration without any scrutiny by the Parliament or the courts."

As Manne puts it, the "declaration is about the human rights situation in Malaysia, whether it is sufficient to ensure the human rights of those refugees deported to Malaysia." In the government's response to the High Court, this is not a matter on which the Court has power to intervene or rule. The High Court, in granting the injunction, seems to think otherwise.

According to Maria O'Sullivan of Monash University it is likely that the High Court will overturn the Malaysian solution. If the High Court finds that children are exempt from the arrangement because the Minister is not fulfilling his legal obligations as guardian it will undermine the deal. The High Court is also likely to find that the Minister's 'declarations' are problematic because Malaysia is not safe for people to be deported to. More broadly, O'Sullivan questions the overall legality of the Malaysian deal saying third country processing contravenes international law because Australia is refusing to examine the asylum seekers prima facie claims for refuge.

Advertisement

On any of these three criteria, the Malaysian 'solution' is not a solution for anyone: especially children.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Jo Coghlan is a lecturer in the School of Arts and Social Sciences at Southern Cross University.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Jo Coghlan

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Jo Coghlan
Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy