I would not been concerned about what the Muslim loaded Refugee Rights Council believes about Australia. They fail to speak out about the causes of persons displacement by Muslim terrorists. Solve the problems at the source, rather than criticize safe countries.

In a follow up to another of Foxy's inane and getting closer to insane comments.
If we are breaking international law, I was curious to know more and why, so I watched the link, and apart from it sounding very much like Foxy, ie; making a lot of statements plagiarizing comments, and giving no actual and viable info or solutions, I found only continuous mention of these so called laws, no actual references, of the law/s or it's/their wording.
I did find however the words international law mentioned so many times as to make me think of the saying, if you say something enough times it will be believed.
Then there is the bigger question, and the one which would tell people like Foxy 'to put or shut up', and that is; if we simple people break the law we are swiftly charged and dealt with.
Would someone like to show me where the Aussie govt has been charged with any wrong doing, let alone having broken some alleged 'International Law/s'?
Foxy, would you like to take on this challenge as you seem adept in quoting references and links and in so doing you will get the satisfaction of proving me wrong?

Dear Shadow minister,

You wrote;

"As per a previous thread, the difference between the boat and plane arrivals is that illegal boat arrivals generally destroy their documentation and rehearse their sob stories making it very difficult to verify their real status whereas plane arrivals need not only correct documentation, but legitimate visas before they can fly to Aus resulting in the vast majority of plane arrivals being deported."

There is not a single person in detention on Manus or Nauru which is without identification so stop with your rubbish.

You haven't denied the record numbers of fly in protection visa numbers under Dutton, but the claim the vast majority are returned is just bonkers. Certainly the not from the places we normally get asylum seekers by boat at least.

In 2017-18 80% of those from Iraq who flew in and then sought protection visas were granted them. From Syria the number was 100%, from Pakistan 80%, from Lybia 99%, and from Iran 85%.

You are probably correct in saying there are more economic refugees among those flying in under Dutton. This would mean very few of those coming by boat fit that description. By your own words mate.

ATRAV,

As I said, there is nobody and nothing to enforce this international law nonsense. It's all a farce. International law declared that China had no right do what it is doing in the South China Sea; but they are still doing it and will continue to do it. We have nothing ro fear by protecting our sovereign borders, and never did have.

Australia is a signatory to the 1951 Refugee
Convention. This is a legal document.
Australia needs to comply with its legal obligations.
Australia played a key role in drafting the
international agreements that protect people
fleeing persecution and other forms of serious harm.

Each person has a right to seek asylum as a matter
of this international law. People who come here in
search of protection have not broken the law.
Australia is breaking the law by not offering people
protection when they are in need of it.

Also indefinite mandatory off shore detention is
also contrary to this international law.
Australia's reputation is at stake.

There is further information given in the following
link:

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/australia-s-refugee-policy-is-out-of-step-with-global-standards-and-breaks-international-law-report

http

Foxy, bunkum and balderdash.
Your link is not relevant.
You speak of 'legal' documents and as though you are an authority on the topics you comment on.
Your link is moot, with statements like, 'A world-leading centre on refugee law said.......'.
Your doing it again, the question is so obvious it hurts, and that is, why are you getting your cue's and info from such spurious sources?
I don't care what SBS or the university of the plebs say, what I read and garner from this useless attempt at left whinge virtue shaming are words like policy and policy agenda.
No-where do I see any mention of a single reference to THE LAW/S you and the rest of the bleeding hearts go on about.
I actually would like to find that there is or are laws which will vindicate you, because then I too will be better informed.
Another thing which burns my bunions is, why should I or anyone else agree with something which we do not agree with?
It is a dangerous fool who freely allows more people into a country than it can sustain.
Treaties, agreements, policies, call them whatever you like, they are not law, as far as I am concerned I would not allow another person in unless or until we had a clear and definite need for them.
I'm sorry that people like yourself, who 'feel' for the underdog or the downtrodden, but like everything in life, it has to be managed.
The current slow rate of migrant intake, and the 'stalling' game of parking them off-shore is none of your or my business.
The govt, as lacking as it is, is doing the right thing, 'for the greater good', or is that not acceptable to you, and to hell with the well being and security of those of us already here, just let the poor beggars in you say.
Well sorry and for once I agree with the govt's stall tactics, for whatever their reason/s.