Published in THEGLOBEANDMAIL
These facts demonstrate that Australia, with its influence on the UNHCR and IOM, has failed to honour its human rights obligations and has perpetrated a crime against humanity.
This crime cannot be regarded as excusable and exceptional, justified under Australia’s border protection policy. Australia must be held accountable, particularly because its policies targeted innocent people who were already victims of war, genocide and persecution.
But Australia is not alone in bearing responsibility for the appalling treatment of refugees. Both the UNHCR and IOM are complicit in Australia’s brutal policies.
In September 2016, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) joined the ‘UN Family’, rebranding itself the ‘UN Organization for Migration’. However, IOM does not have a rights-based protection mandate. This NGO has been the active supplier of Australia’s deterrence agenda in Indonesia, which violates both refugee rights and its obligation to the UN. This is an indefensible conflict in IOM’s credibility, in its attempt at selling itself as the ‘UN Migration Agency’ while simultaneously detaining, deterring and deporting refugees and asylum seekers.
The UNHCR has blocked the refugees’ access to its refugee resettlement process, which it manages on behalf of the international community. And IOM has selectively granted or withheld access to accommodation and financial support to refugees, for which the international community pays. The behaviour of these NGOs, which are supposed to protect refugees’ human rights and safety, shows they are active players in Australia and Indonesia’s punishing policies. This is why refugees have lost both trust in the NGOs and their hopes for a better future.
Firstly, although the UNHCR and IOM claim to be the pillars of human rights protection in the world. In Indonesia, they have chosen to actively support Australia’s deterrence policy against refugees, which contravenes the 1951 UNHCR Declaration on Refugees. Therefore, both NGOs must be held responsible for their silence over Australia’s deterrence policy, and for their active involvement in this crime.
Secondly, Australia’s refugee policy and its influence in border policing, have affected the refugees’ chances for resettlement as other countries are adopting the most punishing aspects of Australia’s policies. Refugees can accept that Australia has no desire to help those detained in Indonesia. However, it should not be assumed that they want to resettle in Australia at any cost.
Refugees will only pursue the closest option that provides safety, and opportunity for a peaceful life. Australia’s damaging role in refugee’s prospects for the quest of protection means it must compensate all the refugees detained and withheld in Manus, Nauru, and Indonesia for the suffering that its discriminatory policies have caused to us. Australian refugee policies have failed to uphold the principles of international law and thus constitute a crime against humanity.