'The illegal action, in attempting to circumvent Australia’s migration laws, is patent evidence of bad character and should warrant expulsion and a life ban on ever getting a visa into Australia.'

Col Rouge, you have been told it often enough. Unauthorised arrival is not illegal under Australian law.

Still, though I have read the Migration Act a few times, I am not a lawyer. Can you tell me where it says that unauthorised arrival is illegal? Indeed, the Act seems to provide an alternative means of legitimation.

I cannot find anything in the Criminal Code, either--and there are no punishments for unauthorised arrivals. The High Court has held that detention is not a punishment, too.

'The economic opportunists who float here on the currents, lacking a visa or usually other documents which would prove the fraudulence of their claim.'

Where is your evidence that there is any significant number of economic opportunists, who are not weeded out by Australia's tough processes? This comment appears to be pure prejudice.

And why would genuine refugees carry identity documents? If they were captured before they got away, their relatives would be set at risk, as well an anyone who helped them get away.

For the sake of an example, where are you proposing that Sri Lankan refugees should go to be processed? To some country where their arrival is authorised? (Is there one?) Once they flee, what is the proper process, in your view? Is there something morally special about the nearest refugee camp?

CJ, even Leigh might be redeemed. But I agree that a person who thought that your proper response to genocide is to stay at home, struggle for change and be killed, in the hope that your martyrdom will produce some good, tries the patience of a saint.
(No, I'm an atheist.)

Yabby,

If you want certainty, you won't get it. We have no choice but to go on a strong balance of probabilities. There is debate about what is enough evidence--but when we have got it wrong, people have been sent back to be killed

I am sort of tired of the same sad story. I did marry a refugee and know it is not all as it seems at times. They get their refugee status then a few months later back home for a holiday..in fear of returning?

Whenever you ask for further information no reply or you are racist, mental ill patient or some sort of admonishment from those that need a segment of society to belittle, not fashionable anymore to belittle those of colour so us it is. They always need someone to hate though.

Tired of it and if by design turns one against another due to what they force you to accept. History repeats.

They say for example that we we force just one home they may get killed so that is bad. Yet we have allowed entry to the LTTE members which has been reported as running deep throught the Sri Lankan diaspora in Australia. So we have faciliated the raising of funds for the LTTE human rights abuses which has resulted in probably far more deaths and horrific loss of civilian life. Oh but who are we to ask what they do with their money if it is not used against us? Very hypocritical. Just seems the majority Sri Lankan asylum seekers have travelled by conventional means. The boat people who cannot get documentation, but can get a lot of money, does make one think they are being funded, or smuggled, by the LTTE here in Australia. Why is this such a hard question, I am no expert but those that feign they are seem high on empty rhetoric and low on facts.

If we cannot ask such questions then it is probably wise to remove ourselves from the obligation under the UN convention because the trust is simply not there and it will only continue to hurt this country.

Ozbib,

--Re : “Col Rouge, you have been told it often enough. Unauthorised arrival is not illegal under Australian law.”

You’re a little mixed-up Ozbib.
It is illegal to entry the country as the boaties have done.
Their position only becomes legitimate --after-- they are processed & accepted as “refugees”

It is illegal to arrive in this country without the proper paperwork.
It is illegal to tell lies to immigration officials about your history /status.
It is illegal to sabotage passenger carrying shipping.
[I’m sure that at least one of the above is applicable to most of them]

--Re“ For the sake of an example, where are you proposing that Sri Lankan refugees should go to be processed? To some country where their arrival is authorised? (Is there one?)”
Um, INDIA.
They should feel right at home their with 60 million other Tamils all sharing the same language and culture.
And when you take into account the famous Morgan doctrine (often enunciated by your mate CJ Morgan with regard to Afghanistan ):If you contribute to the conflagration you have an obligation to pick up the fall out – India or certain parts of India have been up to their hocks in the conflict – so India would have a Morganian obligation to take all and sundry.

--Re “Where is your evidence that there is any significant number of economic opportunists”
I’ll tell you how you can find –don’t be lazy and expect others to do it for you (most lefties are lazy wanting everyone to dish it up for them!) --do a little research for yourself.
After your “ refugees” have obtained residency.
And after they have sponsored their mother, father and sixteen cousins , and eighteen adopted brothers.Quietly go an observe them, and count the number that return to their much feared place of persecution. My first hand experience has been that practically all do.
[ and see TheMissus's comment below testifying the same]

Australia’s “tough processes” ---what a joke

*but when we have got it wrong, people have been sent back to be killed*

So how many have been killed Ozbib? I remind you that in Iran
alone, around 31'000 people a year die from road deaths.

http://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-general-/iran-road-deaths-soar-in-first-five-months-08972.html

If we risk living, we risk dying. Are you now suggesting that
60 million people from Iran should move here, because we have safer
roads?

*And why would genuine refugees carry identity documents?*

Why indeed, when we know that those arriving here by boat, commonly
flew to Malaysia, even from Sri Lanka, to board a boat, when they
had documents. If you are not aware, no documents means no flight.

*We have no choice but to go on a strong balance of probabilities*

Exactly!. There is a strong probability that those in refugee
camps are in fact genuine refugees, not so for boat people, who
simply have enough money to buy a ticket to the West.

*If some others are kept longer in refugee camps as a result, that's the fault of the Australian Government.*

Hang on Ozbib, Australia is not responsible for the welfare of
10 million refugees! That is the responsibility of the UN,
with all its 200 members. Australia has agreed to take 13'000
a year, which is generous by global standards.

*And until those camps are made safe, and their residents are ensured of quidk processing, it is not reasonable to expect people to stay there.*

Indeed the UN could do lots to improve those camps. But then some
streets in our cities are not safe either. What you are implying
however, is that Australia should not have sovereignty over its
own borders and who comes here. If people are fleeing persecution,
they are clearly safer there, then in their home countries, or they
would not be there. Australia does not have an obligation to solve
the world's problems and indeed it cannot.