Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Racial tensions in australia
Australia racism case
Racial tensions in australia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Racial tensions in australia
Australia has committed 143 human rights violations, and has started to ruin our national reputation. Nobody wants to be called a racist. Unfortunately, many people worldwide are calling Australians exactly that. If one looks at Australian history, they will see that our white ancestors weren’t really racially tolerant at all, which left us with a bad reputation as racists. We’ve worked for many years to change how the world sees us as a country, but now we’ve undone all of that hard work by deciding to turn back the boats. However, by doing this, we’ve not only been called racists, but we’ve also broken international human rights laws that we swore not to break with the UN, severed relations with other countries, and pushed many of these innocent asylum seekers to the brink of suicide.
We’ve recently decided to do one of two things with asylum seekers:
The first thing we’re doing is: when a boat is intercepted or reaches an island owned by Australia, it may be sent back to its country of origin. In a desperate bid to increase the likelihood of boats being turned back, the government has in a way “changed the borders” of Australia, by saying these islands are no longer Australian soil, and if you land there, bad luck, you’re going back home.
The second option is if they reach Australia, or sometimes an Australian owned island, is mandatory detention. Australia is one the very few countries to employ mandatory detention. An Australian government website states this chilling fact, leaving the reader wondering just how bad conditions are in these centres:
“Australian law does not set out standards for conditions or treatment of people in immigration detention.”
As if that’s not bad enough, the way we’re treating the asylum seeker...
... middle of paper ...
... 2007-2011, America allowed 278,850 asylum seekers to enter their country, which has a population of 313.9m, while Australia only allowed 40,320 asylum seekers in, with a population of only 22.68m. Why waste the opportunity to give these people jobs, force them to live in taxpayer-funded detention centres, and then subject them to cruel treatment? Wouldn’t the population growth help increase GDP, make more opportunities for jobs and help boost international relations with our multicultural way of life?
It makes absolutely no sense.
Australia really needs to understand the consequences of what we think is a harmless act, and realise that it isn’t ok to treat human beings like this: if we think doing these cruel deeds is ok, and then we point the finger at countries like North Korea for their terrible prison conditions, doesn’t that make us a nation of hypocrites?
The 2014 Walkley Award winning documentary, "Cronulla Riots: the day that shocked the nation" reveals to us a whole new side of Aussie culture. No more she’ll be right, no more fair go and sadly no more fair dinkum. The doco proved to all of us (or is it just me?) that the Australian identity isn’t really what we believe it to be. After viewing this documentary
...be taken into custody for deportation; and if that, it is argued they may also be held for some undetermined
Pauline Hanson’s view on migration is incorrect. Ceasing migration would not be good for Australia either culturally or economically. An intelligent and sophisticated immigration program, which focuses strongly on skilled and business migration, can have a beneficial impact on our economy.
The number of people that are detained within immigration detention in Australia changes constantly. As of 30th of November 2015, there were 1,852 people held in immigration detention facilities and 585 in community detention. 174 children were being detained in closed immigration detention facilities: 104 were being held in closed immigration detention facilities within Australia and 70 children were detained in the Regional Centre in Nauru. However, there was also 331 children in community detention in Australia. That’s over 400 children being held in detention centres. Australia’s refugee policy has no set time limit to how long a person may be held in immigration detention. The period of time in which an individual spends in detention may vary from a few
Ss 189, 196 and 198 of the Migration Act can authorise the indefinite detention of non citizens. Even if it is unlikely that removal of an unlawful non citizen will happen in the foreseeable future, it does not mean that detention is not for the purpose of removal.
Controversy has surrounded Australia’s boat arrivals since 2001, when the Howard government took office. Howard instituted Operation Relex, a policy directing the Royal Australian Navy to intercept and board suspected illegal entry vessels, or SIEV’s (Turning Back Boats). Initially widely accepted, this policy was designed to discourage people from arriving illegally by boat. However, turning back small, overcrowded boats, and returning them just inside Indonesian waters, quickly became a safety issue (Turning Back Boats). According to the “Senate Select Committee’s Inquiry into a Certain Maritime Incident,” of the 12 boats intercepted from September 2002 to March 2003, four were turned back and three sank, killing two people (Turning Back Boats). Although Australia has a right to protect its borders from illegal aliens, over 90% of these asylum-seekers qualify as refugees (Turning Back Boats). Such a low success rate is reason enough to end the hazardous practice, but even more concerning are the detention centers where the remaining 10% are held. In 2001, the Howard government passed the Pacific Solution, authorizing the transport of asylum-seekers to island nations and offshore detention centers (Turning Back Boats). Since then, countless human rights violations have occurred at the Christmas Island, Manus Island, and Nauru detention centers (Murray). The asylum-seekers, some children, are often detained in poor conditions for indefinite periods of time, subjected to enhanced screenings, and refused legal representation or the right to appeal (Australia). After Howard left office in 2006 the refugee policies stopped, and the Australian government worked to heal the damage done to the islanders and its international reputation (Turning Back Boats). However, under PM Tony Abbott, the asylum seeker policies returned in 2014 through Operation Sovereign
In this particular article the UN was asked to comment on Solitary confinement the common for of toucher as stated by the UN themselves in prisons across Canada. This reading is intended for anyone grades 8 and up the language and consent is simple and easy to understand. This article was particularly useful as it called out Canada for their unjust use of solitary confinement. The article brought to light all the negative aspects of this form of
The conditions of Australia’s immigration detention policies have also been cause for concern for probable contraventions of Articles 7 and 10 of the ICCPR. Whilst in Sweden, asylum seekers are afforded free housing whilst their applications are being processed, Australia’s methods are much more callous. Under the Pacific Solution, maritime asylum seekers are sent to impoverished tropical islands with no monitoring by human rights organisations allowed (Hyndman and Mountz, 2008). The UNHCR criticised Australia’s offshore processing centres stating that “significant overcrowding, cramped living quarters, unhygienic conditions, little privacy and harsh tropical climate contribute to the poor conditions of… Nauru and Papua New Guinea” (Morales
Australia has constantly subsisted to be supposed by others as possessing a welcoming outlook to asylum seekers; despite this, the with the arrival of the first wave of boats carrying people seeking asylum in the 1990’s enforced the government to create essential alterations to its policies. The Labour Party has generally been perceived as liberal within its methodology to asylum seekers, contradicting this, with the cultivating distressing challenges being positioned on asylum seekers, their policies instigated to redirect the positions of the greater public and they developed far less accepting. The initial effect towards this issue was the modification in the current law to place asylum seekers in mandatory detentions. Subsequently after
“Today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human History. We reflect on their past mistreatment. We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations—this blemished chapter in our nation’s history. The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia’s history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future. We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians” (apology by Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, 16th November 2009, Parliament House, Canberra.)
It is evident current domestic law in regards to the treatment of refugees provides a leeway of extensive financial burden and most importantly inhumane treatment of detainees. It is questionable however, whether Australia is able to achieve justice for detainees by breaking its domestic law and reforming its priority towards the United Nations Convention Relating to the status of refugees the country is signatory of. Australia has statistically implanted just 10 per cent of the 145 recommendation it has accepted under the United Nations Convention Relating to the status of refugees. It is arguably acknowledged by surrounding nations, by furthering Australia’s refugee treatment on the basis of international law detainees will be off subject to less inhumane practices. It is further evident by breaking Australia’s domestic law with the relevant issue, children and refugees will be subject to subdued environments ultimately altering their physical and mental stress. Public pressure is deemed as a vital tool in order to reform policies and procedures. Nora Hannagan argues that society as a collective and individuals within it must take responsibility for the harms which result from
I am strongly against restricting immigrants from coming into Australia because Australia is a multicultural and multiracial country. This is evident throughout Australia with our foods, lifestyles and cultural practices. I truly believe in the fact that we let legal immigrants into our country, but displacing illegal immigrants is not the right way to do things. Australia as a collective should help these people find their way to a better future.
Australia has signed a major number of international treaties as well is a member of the United Nations and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees due to the recent refugee crisis has discussed a lot on the issue. But the treaties have never been enforced and Malse is one of the many detainees. Some of the treaties include the International Covenant on the Civil and Political Rights, Convention on the rights of the Child among others.
The Australian government later on became in breach of international law as we were going against the UNDHR (that we are a signatory to) pertaining to the illegal detention of refugees. According to the UN high commissioner “The 1951 Convention specifically bars countries from punishing people who have arrived directly from a country of persecution (or from another country where protection could not be assured), provided that they present themselves speedily to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry. Monitoring (through reporting obligations or guarantor requirements) is often a perfectly viable alternative to imprisoning asylum-seekers”. Detention is only acceptable if it is brief, absolutely necessary, and instituted after other options have been implemented. With what the Australian government is currently doing with keeping refugees in detention we are as a result in breach of this. Last year (2016) between the months of July and November the average asylum seeker had been in detention for 500 days. Due to this we are in breech of the convention. Being in breach of this presents an enormous problem that faces Australian politics and may lead top prosecution at an international level. It was clear to see that both parties advocated for an offshore processing facility this is evident with the September 2001 introduction of the
The Human Rights Commission (2014, p. 62) argues that Australia has a duty of care to all people in detention centres especially children, which is currently unmet due to the unsafe conditions of detention centres. From January 2013 to March 2014, it was found that there were 233 incidents of assault involving children, 27 acts of hunger strikes by children, and 33 reported incidents of sexual assault mostly involving children (Human