Tim lawson
Greens Senator slams new immigration laws
May 4th 2011 04:10
[Originally published in the Australian Institute of International Affairs' publication Monthly Access]
The Gillard government is foreshadowing new legislation to combat the recent spate of riots and protests that have been occurring recently at Australian detention centres. Immigration Minister Chris Bowen has proposed new laws that strengthen the immigration character test to make sure any refugees convicted of a criminal offence while in detention would be denied a protection visa.
"These changes will remove any doubt around the character test and send a strong and clear message that the kind of unacceptable behaviour we saw recently at the Christmas Island and Villawood detention centres will not be tolerated," Mr Bowen said in a statement.
I spoke with Greens immigration spokeswoman Senator Hanson-Young who has slammed the new legislation proposed by Mr Bowen.
“Based on what the minister has announced, I’m strongly opposed, I don’t think we should be in any way going back to the failed policies of the Howard government, we shouldn’t be even entertaining the idea of temporary protection visas (TPVs) and it’s very disappointing that the Labor government, despite denouncing them, has now decided to back them and reintroduce them,” Senator Hanson-Young said.
According to an April 29 National Vistas article, Scott Morrison, the Opposition Immigration spokesman, described Mr Bowen’s new laws as just another form of TPV; adding that the minister already has the power to punish wrongdoers.
Senator Hanson-Young speculated that the reason Mr Bowen is trying to bring forward legislation to toughen the immigration character test is to present a position of strength: “The government doesn’t actually need legislation to bring back temporary protection visas, he [Mr Bowen] can do that anyway, but of course the justification, an excuse for bringing back temporary protection visas, is that he wants to toughen up the character test.
“He [Mr Bowen] wants all the papers to say he’s getting tough, he wants people saying that he is taking this issue seriously. It’s not for any practical reason it’s all for show.”
Senator Hanson-Young plans to subject the new legislation to intense scrutiny: “Once we do see it [the new legislation] we’ll obviously go through it with a fine tooth comb, I’ll insist that it goes to a senate inquiry so that we can actually have a good look at the legislation rather than simply allowing the government to ram it through, which they sound as though they would like to do.”
“From what he [Mr Bowen] said it is all about taking away...the discretions of the courts. So, currently [with] the character test you have to have to be convicted of a very serious crime, you have to have done jail for at least 12 months...It doesn’t specifically say that, but that’s the principle – that it’s meant to be for a serious crime.
Senator Hanson-Young believes that Mr Bowen is seeking to shield himself from potential future legal proceedings: “What he [Mr Bowen] wants to do is to amend it to take away any strict principle, because of course if he was to enforce the character test, as it is, somebody could challenge that in court.
“And you could challenge it because you could say well it doesn’t actually specifically say I had to be convicted of this crime...the persons lawyer would be arguing that their client has no character issues. They may have been imprisoned for a protest on the roof, but let’s understand the context by which this took place: people’s applications are taking too long; they have been pushed to breaking point they are in desperation. They could argue that in a court of law.
“The minister [Mr Bowen] would find it very difficult to justify his stance. So what he wants to do is to ensure that any type of conviction, even if it’s a good behaviour bond, even if it’s a slap on the wrist because somebody was protesting on the roof, even if it was because somebody was involved in a fight that broke out and subsequently charged with assault – regardless of the context. If the court had convicted somebody, no matter how minor the offence was that would automatically mean a failure of the character test. So then that person couldn’t challenge the minister’s decision in a court.
“Anyone who is convicted of absolutely anything...automatically fails the character test – he [Mr Bowen] can write legislation to do that. Then the courts would find it very difficult to argue because that’s the law; and there is no kind of grey and ambiguity in it.”
Mr Bowen has stated that once somebody has failed the character test they will be unable to obtain a permanent protection visa (PPV) – even if they are found to be in genuine need of protection.
“When their case for asylum has been assessed we won’t give them a protection visa, we will put them on a temporary visa – with less rights; all the negative elements that come with temporary protection visas of years gone past under the Howard government: no family reunion, probably very limited work rights[and the constant fear of being sent back]”, Senator Hanson-Young said, “the fear of being sent back is really even more compounding than the fact that they got a slap on the wrist for getting into a brawl in an overcrowded detention centre with a bunch of 17 year olds in Darwin; for example, a young...boy fears he will be sent back to Afghanistan and executed – so it’s a life sentence”.
“Even though the courts decided when they convicted him they know the context of the situation; he’s not a bad person, he’s a young boy who has severe mental health issues, has been locked up, suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder etc. The courts take all those things into consideration when they make these decisions about what kind of conviction or sentence somebody should be given,” Senator Hanson-Young said, “the minister [Mr Bowen] with his announcement [of the new laws] wants to override all of that, it doesn’t matter what the court says he will make a decision by saying because you were given some type of conviction you will automatically fail the character test – no questions asked”.
The new legislation will be backdated. In response to this, Senator Hanson-Young stated: “I don’t think retrospectivity in law making is ever particularly smart. We don’t like it for a variety of reasons, and on something like this when it’s meant to be a deterrent as the minister [Mr Bowen] argues, a deterrent for people’s behaviour, why would you decide to implement it retrospectively. If it is a deterrent then people need to know about it beforehand. To me, it just proves that this is not about the principle of people who break the law being dealt with through the justice system or indeed the strengths and weaknesses of the character test, this is all about the government looking as though they can compete with the Coalition on looking tough.”
[Timothy Lawson is a freelance journalist and the editor of Lot’s Wife.]
Twitter: @TJLFreelance
The Gillard government is foreshadowing new legislation to combat the recent spate of riots and protests that have been occurring recently at Australian detention centres. Immigration Minister Chris Bowen has proposed new laws that strengthen the immigration character test to make sure any refugees convicted of a criminal offence while in detention would be denied a protection visa.
"These changes will remove any doubt around the character test and send a strong and clear message that the kind of unacceptable behaviour we saw recently at the Christmas Island and Villawood detention centres will not be tolerated," Mr Bowen said in a statement.
I spoke with Greens immigration spokeswoman Senator Hanson-Young who has slammed the new legislation proposed by Mr Bowen.
“Based on what the minister has announced, I’m strongly opposed, I don’t think we should be in any way going back to the failed policies of the Howard government, we shouldn’t be even entertaining the idea of temporary protection visas (TPVs) and it’s very disappointing that the Labor government, despite denouncing them, has now decided to back them and reintroduce them,” Senator Hanson-Young said.
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young
According to an April 29 National Vistas article, Scott Morrison, the Opposition Immigration spokesman, described Mr Bowen’s new laws as just another form of TPV; adding that the minister already has the power to punish wrongdoers.
Senator Hanson-Young speculated that the reason Mr Bowen is trying to bring forward legislation to toughen the immigration character test is to present a position of strength: “The government doesn’t actually need legislation to bring back temporary protection visas, he [Mr Bowen] can do that anyway, but of course the justification, an excuse for bringing back temporary protection visas, is that he wants to toughen up the character test.
“He [Mr Bowen] wants all the papers to say he’s getting tough, he wants people saying that he is taking this issue seriously. It’s not for any practical reason it’s all for show.”
Senator Hanson-Young plans to subject the new legislation to intense scrutiny: “Once we do see it [the new legislation] we’ll obviously go through it with a fine tooth comb, I’ll insist that it goes to a senate inquiry so that we can actually have a good look at the legislation rather than simply allowing the government to ram it through, which they sound as though they would like to do.”
“From what he [Mr Bowen] said it is all about taking away...the discretions of the courts. So, currently [with] the character test you have to have to be convicted of a very serious crime, you have to have done jail for at least 12 months...It doesn’t specifically say that, but that’s the principle – that it’s meant to be for a serious crime.
Senator Hanson-Young believes that Mr Bowen is seeking to shield himself from potential future legal proceedings: “What he [Mr Bowen] wants to do is to amend it to take away any strict principle, because of course if he was to enforce the character test, as it is, somebody could challenge that in court.
“And you could challenge it because you could say well it doesn’t actually specifically say I had to be convicted of this crime...the persons lawyer would be arguing that their client has no character issues. They may have been imprisoned for a protest on the roof, but let’s understand the context by which this took place: people’s applications are taking too long; they have been pushed to breaking point they are in desperation. They could argue that in a court of law.
“The minister [Mr Bowen] would find it very difficult to justify his stance. So what he wants to do is to ensure that any type of conviction, even if it’s a good behaviour bond, even if it’s a slap on the wrist because somebody was protesting on the roof, even if it was because somebody was involved in a fight that broke out and subsequently charged with assault – regardless of the context. If the court had convicted somebody, no matter how minor the offence was that would automatically mean a failure of the character test. So then that person couldn’t challenge the minister’s decision in a court.
“Anyone who is convicted of absolutely anything...automatically fails the character test – he [Mr Bowen] can write legislation to do that. Then the courts would find it very difficult to argue because that’s the law; and there is no kind of grey and ambiguity in it.”
Mr Bowen has stated that once somebody has failed the character test they will be unable to obtain a permanent protection visa (PPV) – even if they are found to be in genuine need of protection.
“When their case for asylum has been assessed we won’t give them a protection visa, we will put them on a temporary visa – with less rights; all the negative elements that come with temporary protection visas of years gone past under the Howard government: no family reunion, probably very limited work rights[and the constant fear of being sent back]”, Senator Hanson-Young said, “the fear of being sent back is really even more compounding than the fact that they got a slap on the wrist for getting into a brawl in an overcrowded detention centre with a bunch of 17 year olds in Darwin; for example, a young...boy fears he will be sent back to Afghanistan and executed – so it’s a life sentence”.
“Even though the courts decided when they convicted him they know the context of the situation; he’s not a bad person, he’s a young boy who has severe mental health issues, has been locked up, suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder etc. The courts take all those things into consideration when they make these decisions about what kind of conviction or sentence somebody should be given,” Senator Hanson-Young said, “the minister [Mr Bowen] with his announcement [of the new laws] wants to override all of that, it doesn’t matter what the court says he will make a decision by saying because you were given some type of conviction you will automatically fail the character test – no questions asked”.
The new legislation will be backdated. In response to this, Senator Hanson-Young stated: “I don’t think retrospectivity in law making is ever particularly smart. We don’t like it for a variety of reasons, and on something like this when it’s meant to be a deterrent as the minister [Mr Bowen] argues, a deterrent for people’s behaviour, why would you decide to implement it retrospectively. If it is a deterrent then people need to know about it beforehand. To me, it just proves that this is not about the principle of people who break the law being dealt with through the justice system or indeed the strengths and weaknesses of the character test, this is all about the government looking as though they can compete with the Coalition on looking tough.”
[Timothy Lawson is a freelance journalist and the editor of Lot’s Wife.]
Twitter: @TJLFreelance
| 37 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog