Our Saturday Roadside demonstrations continue.

 

Human rights matter

Respect and Justice for Refugees

 

Our October fundraiser dinner exceeded all expectations

From the left, Priscilla, Sous chef Mart, Laurie and Chris

Hi Diners and Donor

Our fundraiser takeaway dinner exceeded all our expectations, not only of the amount we raised but of the generosity of all involved: the chef, Ton, and his helper in chief, Chris, sous chef Mart, Ton's family and friends who helped in meal preparation and you, the diners and donors.

The food, as many of you have expressed to us, was delicious and professionally presented.

The Chef, Ton, poised to….?

We have raised a total of $6,120.00 to send to the Asylum Seekers Centre in Sydney. Of that amount, $1,780.00 is in donations and $70.00 in raffle ticket purchases. These amounts may change as we receive late donations. This money will be sent this week.

The raffle winners were Katherine from Bellingen who will be enjoying a stay at the Sawtell BnB, Carol from Repton who with three friends will join Ton in a sourdough making workshop, and Glenys from Sawtell who will enjoy her prize of 6 bottles of wine.

Thank you, thank you and again a  BIG THANK YOU to Ton, Chris and team.

Margie and Georgie.

Letter to Director Regional Processing and Resettlement Department of Home Affairs

 

                                                                                 

                                                                                                ........

Valla

                                                                                                NSW...

                                                                                             

                                                                                                19^th October 2020

REF: MC20-022077

Dear Director,

Thank you for your letter of 6^th October in response to my letter of 27^th July 2020.

In your letter, you state, inter alia, that “the length and conditions of immigration detention are subject to regular internal and external review”, and you go on to cite a number of external bodies and processes to support your statement. I am familiar with the details of the numerous reports and investigations into the conditions for asylum seekers held in detention, and with the findings of these investigations.

What I am unable to discern from your letter, however, is any evidence of a statutory framework which might underpin the review process. I would therefore be most interested to know:

·       What is the statutory basis for the review process and the related timeframes for the reviews?

·       What is the statutory process for the review of the length of a person’s detention?

·       What provision is there in the process for consideration of natural justice issues?

·       Does a detainee have the right to a review of a decision to not grant a residence determination/ to maintain detention?

I would very much appreciate a response to the above questions at your earliest convenience..

Yours sincerely,

M.......

Letter to Pat Conaghan MP re the slashing of funding to UNRWA in the federal government's 2020 budget,

 Dear Mr Conaghan,

I was dismayed to read in the budget papers that the Coalition government plans to reduce its support to UNRWA by 50%, from $20 million to $10 million.

UNRWA school in the Bourj al-Barajneh refugee camp in Beirut

You may be aware that UNRWA provides vital support for the education of Palestinian children in refugee camps across the Middle East, from the West Bank,  to Lebanon and Jordan. The agency is already massively underfunded as a result of the US government’s decision over a year ago to cease all funding for this vital humanitarian work. It seems that our government is happy to follow Trump’s cruel lead.

Children are our future, wherever they live, and we should feel a moral

UNRWA school in the Bourj al-Barajneh refugee camp in Beirut

obligation to support their educational needs. These funding cuts make it increasingly difficult for these young people to learn and to eventually make a contribution to a better world.

I have seen UNRWA’s work at first hand in Beirut and in the West Bank. The organisation desperately needs our ongoing support, not funding cuts. If we can afford billions to support businesses  during this pandemic, we can surely afford $20 million to maintain our support for the education of Palestinian children.

Yours sincerely

Mike ........ 

Valla Beach

Letter, Oct 6, 2020, from Director Regional Processing and Resettlement Department of Home Affairs for Minister Dutton

Dear Mr G......

Thank you for your correspondence of 27 July 2020 to the Acting Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs, the Hon Alan Tudge MP, concerning refugees and asylum seekers in detention. Your correspondence has been referred to the Minister for Home Affairs, the Hon Peter Dutton MP, as the matter raised falls within his portfolio responsibilities. The Minister appreciates the time you have taken to bring this matter to his attention and has asked that I reply on his behalf.

Regional processing is a key pillar of Operation Sovereign Borders and supports the Australian Government’s strong border protection policies. These policies have successfully stemmed the flow of illegal maritime ventures to Australia, disrupted people smuggling activities in the region and prevented loss of life at sea.

The success of Australia’s border protection policies has also enabled the Government to make a generous contribution to addressing the global humanitarian crisis, and increase our Humanitarian Program annual quota to 18,750 places. This represents the largest ongoing program in over 30 years.

Australia is committed to providing protection to refugees consistent with the obligations set out in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. Regional processing arrangements provide illegal maritime arrivals (IMAs) an opportunity to have their protection claims assessed, and for those found to be refugees, resettlement in a third country, without compromising Australia’s strong border protection policies.

People under regional processing arrangements are treated with respect and dignity, and in accordance with international human rights standards. Their protection claims are assessed by the Governments of Nauru and Papua New Guinea (PNG), and are undertaken in accordance with each country's respective laws and processes.

No refugees under regional processing arrangements in Nauru or PNG are detained in immigration detention. Refugees reside in community accommodation arrangements and are free to move around without restriction.

Individuals under regional processing arrangements receive a range of services to support their stay in Nauru or PNG, including health and welfare, accommodation (rent and utility free), education and employment opportunities.

Medical services are provided through a range of healthcare professionals, including general practitioners, psychiatrists, counsellors, and mental health nurses who provide clinical assessment and treatment. Where clinically indicated, specialist medical treatment is not available in a regional processing country, mechanisms are in place for temporary transfers to a third country, including Australia, for assessment or treatment.

Australia appreciates the offer from the New Zealand Government to resettle refugees, however, we are focused on completing the much larger arrangement with the United States (US). Australia’s border protection policies have removed the incentive for people to join dangerous and illegal people smuggling ventures to Australia. The Government remains mindful of not undoing efforts to combat people smuggling.

The Australian Government’s strong border protection policies and associated management of transitory persons under regional processing arrangements has not changed – illegal maritime arrivals will not be settled in Australia. Consistent with this position, transitory persons brought to Australia from a regional processing country, whether for medical treatment or as accompanying family, are in Australia for a temporary purpose only.

Transitory persons under regional processing arrangements, including those temporarily in Australia, have permanent resettlement options and are being resettled. Transitory persons can seek to resettle in the US or another third country, settle in PNG, or voluntarily return home or to another country in which they have a right of entry. Transitory persons are encouraged to engage in third country resettlement options and take steps to start the next phase of their lives.

The Australian and US Governments remain committed to maximising resettlement opportunities under the US resettlement arrangement.

A total of 4,183 IMAs were transferred to offshore processing under the previous government. Today, there are no refugees in detention under offshore processing and as at 31July 2020, 803 refugees have been resettled under the Government’s resettlement arrangement with the US.

People transferred to and accommodated in immigration detention facilities (IDFs) including Alternative Places of Detention (APODs) are treated in accordance with human rights standards. The Government has contracted appropriately trained and experienced service providers to ensure detainees’ needs are adequately met, including provision of health and welfare services.

There are laws, policies, rules and practices that govern how people are treated in immigration detention facilities in Australia. The length and conditions of immigration detention are subject to regular internal and external review. Internal assurance and external oversight processes are in place to ensure that the health, safety and wellbeing of all detainees is maintained.

Scrutiny from a number of external bodies helps to ensure detainees held in immigration detention are treated humanely and fairly. These parties include parliamentary committees, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Australian Red Cross.

The Department takes its duty of care seriously and ensures that all people in immigration detention have access to health care. Health care services for detainees are comparable to those available to the Australian community, under the Australian public health system. Services are provided through on-site primary and mental health clinics with referral to allied and specialist health providers, as required. Acute care is provided by hospitals.

The placement of an individual considers the safety and good order of the immigration detention network, operational capacity of each facility and the need to ensure the safety and security of all detainees in immigration detention.

Thank you for raising this matter with the Minister. Yours sincerely

Director
Regional Processing and Resettlement Department of Home Affairs
6 October 2020 

 

Readers can comment below. 

" It is fair to conclude that acting Immigration Minister Alan Tudge has a deep contempt for the law.

What else could motivate him, when the Federal Court has just declared in explicit terms that he committed one form of contempt (wilful disobedience of court orders), to just double down on what the court may see as another -- the one it calls “scandalising the court”?

Bear in mind that Tudge’s original contempt was a triple: he refused to comply with an order by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) to release a man from immigration detention, and then ignored orders by two Federal Court judges before finally relenting after five days of maintaining an imprisonment that was completely illegal." Crikey Oct 8, 2020

Some photos from Saturday’s (Oct 3) excellent Valla Beach market.

 

 

Eight Years Too Long

 

 

 

Our September Demo

Seven years too many. Set them free.

Fair go for refugees 

Honk for human rights.

Justice for refugees

Bello Nambucca RAR Newsletter 18 August 2020

WE ARE BACK IN ACTION   A group of eleven RAR supporters met recently to discuss how we can best move forward safely in the current climate. We agreed on the following actions: Roadside demonstrations: We will organise these fortnightly, on Saturday mornings, at three different venues, from 10.00 am until 11.30 am. People who feel that an hour is as much as they can manage are encouraged to arrive at 10.30 am, so that our numbers grow, rather than diminish. Markets: We agreed to restart our market stall, though we will not be asking people to sign petitions. Only two people can be located inside the gazebo at any one time, though it is OK to have one or two people standing at the front of the stall. Mike will organise a roster for each market. Fundraising: We accepted that we can’t organise concerts, lunches and auctions at present, which greatly restricts our ability to raise funds. However, we did come up with some COVID-friendly ideas. Watch this space! Letter-writing: We agreed that this is an important activity for our group, and that we would continue, through the newsletter, to encourage people to write letters to the press and to politicians on specific topics. We agreed that Mike would provide specific suggestions about the content of letters to make it easier for supporters to respond. Newsletter: We agreed that the newsletter will continue to be published fortnightly.

SEVEN YEARS TOO LONG: OUR M.P'S RESPONSE The following letter was received recently from our local MP, Pat Conaghan, in response to a letter from Mike, whose letter is on our blog (http://bellorar.blogspot.com.au): Dear Mr Griffin, I am aware you have long-standing dissatisfaction with the Australian Government and your perception of its handling of asylum seekers who have attempted to circumvent our immigration processes. As I stated in my previous email to you on 8 May 2020, those who are able to prove they are genuine refugees and have not attempted to arrive onshore illegally will receive support to settle in Australia. The Government's policy on people who have tried to enter Australia illegally has not changed. As a sovereign nation, we have every right to protect our borders. We also have the right to refuse entry to those who attempt to come here illegally. We will not be taking up New Zealand’s offer to resettle asylum seekers. New Zealand citizens are automatically granted Special Category visas on arrival in Australia under the Trans-Tasman Arrangement, and this would be another way for these individuals to circumvent our immigration laws. At any time, these people who seek to flout our laws have options that do not require them to be allowed to settle in Australia. These include returning to their country of origin, at the Australian taxpayers’ expense; to reside permanently in Nauru or PNG; or to take up the US Government’s settlement offer. They are not required to stay in detention. I would also point out that of those who have sought medical attention in Australia through the (now repealed) Medevac legislation, around one third have refused treatment. Additionally, a significant proportion of those brought here for treatment are now refusing to leave, despite having signed an agreement agreeing to do so. Australia has one of the most generous humanitarian programs in the world. We do more than most to assist and resettle genuine refugees in need of protection. Yours sincerely,   PAT CONAGHAN MP Federal Member for Cowper Mr Conaghan chooses to ignore the difference between the act of seeking asylum and the formal processes of our immigration system. He continues to assert that it is illegal for people to seek asylum, when it is not. The right to seek asylum is enshrined in international law, to which our government is a signatory. He asserts that asylum seekers who resettle in New Zealand have an automatic right to then seek entry to Australia under the Trans-Tasman agreement, in spite of the fact that the New Zealand government has stated  in recent times that it is a matter for the Australian government to decide who is granted a visa to travel from NZ to Australia. It is not the case that a third of Medevac evacuees have refused medical treatment on arrival in Australia, though it is true that a small number have. The evidence seems to be that, as mentally unwell and confused individuals, who do not speak English, they are fearful about what is happening to them. Little wonder, given that they are kept isolated and under guard, which can only add to their trauma. What stands out in this response is the complete lack of empathy for these people whose lives have been ruined by the direct, punitive action of our government. As far as our politicians are concerned, these asylum seekers have only themselves to blame. Meanwhile, Australian citizens continue to protest at the incarceration of refugees in hotels and in detention centres in Australia. At the weekend, some 400 demonstrators protested outside the Kangaroo Point hotel in Brisbane, where a large number of Medevac refugees have been held for may months. Refugee Action Coalition spokesperson, Ian Rintoul, commented; “We could have them in houses in the community overnight.” The punishment continues.

At Kangaroo Point in Brisbane

Roadside demonstration: Saturday 22nd August from 10.00 am until 11.30    You will find us by the Pacific Highway in Coffs Harbour, opposite the base hospital. Please come and join us if you can, and help us to keep the plight of refugees and asylum seekers in the public eye. We have lots of new banners and placards to share. We hope to see you there. Market stall: Sunday 6th September in Coffs Harbour   We are planning to hold our first market stall in a long time at the Coffs Harbourside market on Sunday 6th September from 9.00 am until 1.30 pm. If you are able to help out for an hour or two, then please contact Mike at: mandm.griffin2@bigpond.com and let him know the times that would be convenient for you. We will need to create a roster to ensure that we don’t have too many people at the stall at any one time. HELPING YOUNG CHILDREN WITH THEIR READING   A group of independent community volunteers are seeking more people to help out with reading to primary school children from resettled former refugee families in Coffs Harbour area.   We co-ordinate with a local Coffs primary school and all you need is a FREE volunteer Working With Children Check, which we can help you to organise. We'll give you all the briefing and simple training. Current and past volunteer readers have found the experience very rewarding and positive. It provides the children with valuable home reading that their parents are unable to provide.  If you would like to join us and have one hour a week after school time then please contact us c/o:  Fi                      Fiona.mcaulay@det.nsw.edu.au

SALE OF WORKS AT THE STRINGER ART GALLERY IN NAMBUCCA   A big thank you to all who have dropped in to see Marlene’s art exhibition in the Stringer Gallery. The works have been selling well, and the attached photo of the exhibition is an updated version, following the sale of a number of paintings. If you are not able to visit the gallery, but would like further details of any of the paintings in the photo, then please contact Marlene at: marlene.griffin46@bigpond.com. It would be wonderful to reach Marlene’s target of $1000 for the ASC!

Check out the index of subjects on our blog http://bellorar.blogspot.com.au

It includes articles from many sources and letters to politicians and newspapers.

This newsletter is sent to >630 recipients

Our Face book is at https://www.facebook.com/Rural-Australians-for-Refugees-Bellingen-and-Nambucca-Districts-269696303205083/timeline/

(579 likes)

Twitter Account @RARBellingenNam

Email address bellingen.rar@gmail.com

The National RAR web site is at  www.ruralaustraliansforrefugees.org.au 

The National RAR facebook site is at  RAR Facebook

Letter: To: Pat.Conaghan.MP@aph.gov.au, Subject: Detention of asylum seekers

Dear Mr Conaghan,

A Biloela family of refugees

M... Griffin has shown me your email reply, dated 5-8-2020, to his email of 27-7-2020 (Seven years too long).

I must take issue with you on several issues in your reply.

You make the point, on several occasions, that these people detained in onshore and off-shore detention facilities are illegal, have attempted to arrive in Australia illegally, or are attempting to subvert our immigration system. If what they have done is illegal can you please point out to me which law of the criminal code they have violated? Have any of these asylum seekers been charged with this crime? Have any of these asylum seekers been tried for this crime?

Refugees locked up indefinitely in Mantra Hotel Melbourne

Under international law (specifically the 1951 Refugee Convention) it is not illegal to seek asylum if one has a well founded fear of persecution. So, arriving in a leaky boat and claiming asylum is not illegal. I understand that Australia is a signatory to the Convention so it appears to me that it is the Australian Government that is acting illegally by refusing asylum to those in our detention system who are genuine refugees.

Under international law, immigration detention is supposed to be administrative and temporary, not punitive. I believe that this is the thrust of Mike Griffin's letter, that the continued detention of these people for seven years can be considered punitive. I despair that our laws descend into a state where punitive measures are considered normal, that everyone is considered to be a potential criminal trying to "flout" or "circumvent" the law, rather than trying to seek the justice in any particular situation.

You also state that refugees have the option to return to their own country. I think you will find that the reason they have been classified as refugees is because they cannot return to their own country.

Free Mantra refugees

You state that these people can choose to reside permanently in Nauru or PNG. I do not think that either of these countries is a safe place to reside. The Smart Traveller website does not make PNG out to be particularly safe. For people fleeing persecution it is not a viable option for most of them.

I have watched the evolution of Australia's asylum seeker policy over the past twenty years and it is as depressing as it is inhumane. International migration is an issue to be managed, not a problem to be solved. It does nobody any good to keep the people in our detention centres in a continuous state of punitive incarceration. We could save a lot of money and the LNP could gain a lot of kudos by finally taking responsibility for the situation and settling all these people into the community. Just do it quickly and quietly and move on to more important issues.

I would hate to be so cynical as to believe that the continued detention of vulnerable people was for political purposes.

Free refugees from Australian detention

Your claim that Australia has one of the most generous humanitarian programs in the world can not go unchallenged. While not wanting to denigrate the good work that is done in this area it is also true that foreign aid has been cut severely over the past seven years by the LNP federal government. While we accept less than 20,000 people through refugee migration per year it pales into insignificance to the four million displaced Syrians currently residing in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. Whatever good work we do is poisoned by the petty and vindictive way we treat asylum seekers who arrive by boat.

Some new thinking is required by you and your government to resolve this issue.

Regards,

Dr Peter XXXXX

VALLA

Fair go for Refugees

Letter to Pat Conaghan MP August 2020

Dear Mr Conaghan,

Thank you for your letter of 5^th August, in response to my letter of  27^th July. I am grateful to you for taking the time to reply.  

End off shore detention.

In your response, you repeatedly refer to the “illegal” actions of those seeking asylum in Australia, and assert that the government will decide who can be allowed to enter the country.

This is incorrect. Australia does not have the right to refuse entry to asylum seekers or refugees who enter Australia “ illegally” under international law. 

Australia is a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which it ratified in 1954. The Convention stipulates for refugees specific rights, including protection from penalties for illegal entry. As a signatory to the 1951 Convention, Australia is not permitted to treat refugees arriving illegally differently from those arriving legally. The 1951 Convention states:

The Convention further stipulates that, subject to specific exceptions, refugees should not be penalized for their illegal entry or stay. This recognizes that the seeking of asylum can require refugees to breach immigration rules. Prohibited penalties might include being charged with immigration or criminal offences relating to the seeking of asylum, or being arbitrarily detained purely on the basis of seeking asylum (introductory note, see further expression of provision under Article 31).

The Australian government’s treatment of asylum seekers and refugees who enter

End off shore detention.

Australia “illegally” is forbidden under other legal instruments. For example, the substantial non-criminal detention and associated harsh treatment of refugees transferred to Papua New Guinea and Nauru is in breach of Australia’s obligations under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, on his official visit to Australia in November 2016, referred to asylum seekers and refugees in involuntary geographical and psychological confinement (although no longer in detention),determining that such treatment constituted cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment according to international human rights law standards.

Under Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution”. Australia was one of eight nations involved in drafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

You state that these refugee and asylum seekers have other options that do not require them to be resettled in Australia, and cite returning to their country of origin, settling in PNG or Nauru, or taking up the US offer of resettlement.

Manus detention camp was deplorable.

In relation to country of origin, refugees are protected from refoulement under international law (Article 33, Refugees Convention, Article 3, CAT). The principle of non-refoulement forms an essential protection under international human rights, refugee, humanitarian and customary law. It prohibits States from transferring or removing individuals from their jurisdiction or effective control when there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be at risk of irreparable harm upon return, including persecution, torture, ill-treatment or other serious human rights violations. As the state party who transferred these individuals to PNG and Nauru, Australia is legally responsible for ensuring that recognised refugees DO NOT return to their country of origin, which includes refoulement by way of coercion.  There is ample evidence that points to the fact that refugees in PNG have been subjected to considerable coercion to persuade them to return to their country of origin. 

 As for residing permanently in PNG or Nauru, in order for local integration for

Justice for refugees

refugees to be an acceptable durable solution, conditions in these countries of asylum must meet minimum standards for local integration. As noted by UNHCR research, local integration as a durable solution typically combines three dimensions:

“Firstly, it is a legal process, whereby refugees attain a wider range of rights in the host state. Secondly, it is an economic process of establishing sustainable livelihoods and a standard of living comparable to the host community. Thirdly, it is a social and cultural process of adaptation and acceptance that enables the refugees to contribute to the social life of the host country and live without fear of discrimination”.

There is no evidence indicating that either Nauru or Papua New Guinea meets these minimum standards for local integration. On the contrary, the circumstances of refugees in these countries are of continuing concern to international human rights bodies.

In relation to resettlement in the US, certain refugees will not be eligible for US resettlement through a range of internal US resettlement criteria and procedures unrelated to an individual’s refugee status. There will evidently be a number who do not travel to the US for a range of reasons outside their control. These individuals remain Australia’s responsibility under international law.

Saturday demo in Coffs yesterday

More broadly, while the chance to rebuild their lives in the US is welcome, it is wholly absurd that another resettlement country has had to step in and provide international protection on Australia’s behalf when Australia has the capacity and legal obligation to do so. It also fails to uphold Australia’s part in international burden-sharing arrangements pertaining to refugee protection and resettlement worldwide. 

If any laws are being “circumvented” or “flouted”, it is these international laws, noted above, to which Australia is bound by its own ratification, which are being violated. Australia’s passage of national laws and policies in contravention of these instruments is not permissible under such treaties.

I note that Australia will not be filling their quota for resettlement this year due to COVID-19 and related processing and travel restrictions. Meanwhile, hundreds of genuine and recognised refugees remain offshore or are detained onshore; individuals that the international community universally regard as Australia’s responsibility. The solution is clear and is 7 years overdue. 

Yours sincerely,

M. Griffin

Valla Beach

Saturday demo in Coffs yesterday