We are more than a little precious in this country in our hysteria about boat arrivals.
briar rose,
there is no hysteria only boat arrivals which should be helped not to have to leave their countries in the first place.

MMM! is there a difference between the Libyan refugees in Malta and the refugees here?

In Malta, people are genuinely fleeing the fighting, as Malta is the closest stop where the government has not just suffered a revolution.

Many are ex pats trying to get home to their countries of origin, and those of Libyan origin are not likely to seek permanent residence.

The refugees in Australia have passed through several peaceful and friendly countries, but would prefer to settle here, as the economically most comfortable.

The standard instruction to boat people has been stated that they are
to throw their documentation over board when the boat leaves Indonesia.
The purpose is said to be that Australia then cannot prove their
nationality and so cannot deport them.

The destruction of passports etc is almost certainly an illegal act as
does arriving in a country by other than regulated transport.
Christmas Island may not have been a "Port of Entry" and it is illegal
to enter a country at other than a designated "Port of Entry".

It is these actions that make them illegal.

That almost all illegal entrants eventually are settled in Australia
probably illustrates the difficulty that the government has in deporting them.
Their countries don't want them back.
I wonder why ?

The destruction of travel and identity documentation occurred blatantly during the rescue of asylum seekers by the Tampa in August 2001. The first mate of the Tampa, Christian Malhaus, testified in a Western Australian court during a people smuggling case that during the rescue he witnessed asylum seekers throw their documentation overboard before boarding the Tampa. The purpose of these actions was obviously to make the establishment of the identities of the asylum seekers, the disproval of their stories of persecution, and their removal to their countries of origin extremely difficult if not impossible.

A boat carrying asylum seekers with documentation was intercepted in July 2001. The boat had departed from Cambodia for Australia with 241 Afghans and Pakistanis on board, who were believed to have paid between $US5,000 and $US10,000 per person for their journey. Note that the average per capita income of Afghanistan is $800 per year or around $2 per day.

The boat was intercepted and most were found carrying Pakistani or Afghan passports, many Afghan documents indicating long term residency of Pakistan. The asylum seekers could have applied to the UNHCR for asylum in Cambodia which is a signatory to the relevant UN conventions. Only after interception did many of the group apply for asylum.

Only 14 of 241 (6%) were accepted by the UNHCR as refugees, and the remainder were returned to their countries of origin. However, if this group of asylum seekers would have destroyed their documents en route and then reached Australia, perhaps most would have been granted protection in Australia due to the difficulty in establishing their identities and disproving their unverifiable stories of persecution.