The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Refugee Realities > Comments

Refugee Realities : Comments

By Andrew Hewett, published 26/3/2008

The aim of Oxfam’s Refugee Realities, a refugee camp simulation in Melbourne, was to help people understand that refugees are no different to the rest of us.

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

”To quote from the 1951 convention: Article 31. Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge

1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.

In other words, the refugee must travel directly from the country of persecution to the country of refuge, without passing through any other countries."

It doesn’t say that at all. It’s saying that signatories to the Convention, i.e. Australia, can’t penalise refugees who arrive without papers provided they present themselves to authorities on their arrival.

”The other thing that interests me in your post is your reference to international law. Who passed this law? By what right? When did the Australian people delegate any right to the United Nations or any other body to legislate on behalf of Australians? I think you will find that international law has no force or effect in Australia except as provided by commonwealth legislation.”

I’m referring to the same 1951 UN Refugee Convention you quoted from. It’s an internationally recognized agreement that Australia signed up to and to which we are still legally bound to this day.

“It would seem to me that most of the muslim inhabitants of the middle east could justifiably be categorised as enemy aliens (as demonstrated by the participants in several terrorist events) and that our acceptance of refugees should be primarily be determined on this basis.”

The majority of asylum seekers to Australia have been proven to be genuine refugees, Muslim or otherwise. It is incorrect to simplistically link Muslim refugees and terrorism, as you’ve done here. Most Muslims are moderates not extremists and no Muslim refugees in Australia have been found to be terrorists.
Posted by Bronwyn, Friday, 28 March 2008 12:10:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BRONWYN....

You quoted the convention..and then went into some denial of the english language mode.

on refugees who, coming DIRECTLY from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show GOOD CAUSE for their illegal entry or presence.

People who come here from Iraq, for example, who go through a number of countries on the way, preferrrrring Australia because they have relatives here.. are not coming DIRECTLY.....nor can they show 'GOOD CAUSE'.. becuase 'good' cause would be 'My life was threatened, so I ran...and here I am. meaning.. I ran to the FIRST place where I could obtain safety..and I'm sorry but Australia is NOT that.

So... they neither have

a)Come directly
b)Good cause.

Thus..the convention does NOT apply to them, and when people twist they convention and deny the plain meaning of the english language in order to get people here.. one can only assume that the motive is nothing more than a thinly disguised POLITICAL exercise in boosting up numbers of people who are then going to be pre-disposed to vote for those who championed their cause in getting here.

Of course, such base motives are always couched in 'bleeding heart sentimentality' as some kind of emotional blackmail against those who use common sense and history (not to mention an understanding of English) as their guide.

Or.. in my case, the argument is "Oh..ur such a baddddd Christian" is thrown around frequently.

So, in terms of the article "Refugee REALITIES" we have pretty well stiched that up.

The only 'real' refugees arriving here, would be those Christians from Irian Jaya and Poso Indonesia who are coming DIRectly as a result of being persecuted by the Jihadists...and for them, I have nothing but open and welcoming arms.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Friday, 28 March 2008 6:03:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Plerdsus

I agree with you that Australia’s population is too high. I’ve already stated that I think our skilled migration program should be wound right back and I disagree totally with the likes of Peter Costello who thinks we need a baby boom.

I also agree that third world population is an enormous problem. I think developed countries should be doing a lot more to assist in establishing effective birth control in all these poorer places. Unfortunately, the power of the pope and misguided Catholic dogma in this area have negated a lot of the good work done by many medical and human rights agencies on the ground.

I agree that Australia is not big enough to really effect solutions to these problems. But as pointed out by Romany, I think our common humanity dictates that we must do what we can. I’m not talking about huge numbers. I’m talking about increasing our annual refugee intake from 8 000 to 20 000 and at the same time dramatically cutting back on skilled migration.

My view is that we’re all in this world together and that developed countries such as ourselves have a responsibility to do what they can. A lot of our wealth has come through exploiting the natural and increasingly the human resources of developing countries. We have to give as well as take. The two million refugees from Iraq for example, camped in overcrowded squalor on its borders, wouldn’t be there if their country hadn’t been illegally invaded by the US and its allies, of whom we are one. We owe them, as simple as that.

You mention Japan. Its per capita population is one of the highest in the world and it has no natural resources to speak of. No one seriously suggests that Japan has the capacity to resettle refugees in any number. My guess is that it assists through donating to aid programs in its region.

Mr Right

“Most blogs are loaded with wet lefties…”

Mud doesn’t stick to “wet lefties”, Mr Right. How about you engage with the issues rather than the name calling.
Posted by Bronwyn, Friday, 28 March 2008 1:14:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Many developing countries haven’t been able to provide basic freedoms, growth and decent living standards, but have developed enough for the emergence of a relatively well-educated middle class who watch the West on TV and the Internet and yearn for the opportunities they see there. Global criminal syndicates dealing in people smuggling target the aspirational middle classes of developing countries and attempt to bypass legal immigration controls by presenting illegal immigrants as asylum seekers in order to exploit compassion in liberal Western democracies such as Australia. They include genuine refugees in each cargo and often include children to ramp up the sympathy factor, so that the distinction between economic migrant and refugee has now unfortunately become very blurred.

Perhaps Oxfam could acknowledge that people attempt to leave dysfunctional third world societies for economic and social reasons as well as for political reasons, and that by posing as asylum seekers and refugees the 1951 Refugee Convention provides them with a chance to gain admittance to the West and all the advantages of living in first world countries.

Adrienne Millbank, an academic from Monash University, wrote a very informative paper entitled “DARK VICTORY OR CIRCUIT BREAKER: AUSTRALIA AND THE INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE SYSTEM POST TAMPA” detailing the disfunctionality of the international refugee system, which can be found at:

http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/view/issue/?volume=11&issue=
Posted by franklin, Friday, 4 April 2008 10:00:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy