Why are there no flowers in Australia?

There are currently 582 children in immigration detention and most of these children are asylum seekers. Since 1994, they have been subject to mandatory and non-reviewable detention. Alexandra Pitsis looks at the issue of children in migration detention, the human cost of this policy and some of the attempts to redress this situation.

In August 2001, the Federal government initiated a new policy where ‘unauthorised arrivals’ including children, have been detained and removed to countries such as Nauru and Papua New Guinea, where their asylum claims are subsequently determined. According to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), it is unclear how many of the children that are detained and removed in this way, will be returned to Australia at a later date, resettled in a third country or returned to their country of origin.¹

Australia has a legal obligation under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to assist a person to make an application for refugee asylum when they are escaping from persecution. The declaration supposes a commitment to humanitarianism and the desire to adhere to humane treatment of people regardless of race and cultural background and clearly states that all persons, including children, have the right to seek and to enjoy in, other countries, asylum from persecution.²

It is a vast jump from the ideals outlined in the declaration to the reality of the treatment and the conditions of child asylum seekers in migration detention. Often, the children and their families are treated like global drift wood.

There needs to be a political shift in thinking about these children, a thinking more in tune with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC), which states, amongst other aspects, that children have inalienable rights including medical attention and mental wellbeing, and access to culturally appropriate avenues of expression and identity.³

The National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention

In 1998, HREOC reported that Australia’s policy of detention, including that of children, is in breach of its international human rights obligations. For children, the Convention prohibits unlawful or arbitrary detention, where detention is supposed to be used only ‘as a last resort’.⁴ Article 37 (b) of the Convention provides that ‘no child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time.’

‘The climate in detention centres is not right in terms of protecting children,’ says the Human Rights Commissioner, Dr Sev Ozdowski. ‘Our visit to Woomera [Detention Centre] indicated that there are particular breaches to the CROC. Children should be detained as a last resort and for the shortest period of time, they should receive proper schooling, they should be protected from violence. What we found at Woomera was a culture of despair, a culture of violence and it was impossible to isolate children from what was happening there. There were buildings being burned, there was self-harming behaviour, lip sewing and a whole range of other incidents. They were not the kinds of circumstances in which children should be brought up.’

Following reports of breaches of conventions, Dr Ozdowski, announced a National Inquiry into Children in Immigration detention. The Inquiry is to look at the adequacy and appropriateness of Australia’s treatment of child asylum seekers and other children who are, or have been, held in immigration detention.

The terms of reference for the Inquiry include consideration of mandatory detention of child asylum seekers, alternatives to their detention and additional measures which may be required in immigration detention facilities to protect the human rights of all detained children.

The Inquiry will be conducted during 2002 and will consider submissions and visit major detention centres and facilities. Public hearings will be conducted and experts in dealing with children in detention are encouraged to make submissions. Its final report will be made to Federal parliament at the end of 2002.

What is the typical profile of a child asylum seeker?

These children arrive in Australia with or without their parents and many children travel alone in horrifying conditions. As a result from fleeing harsh and terrifying political upheaval and vilification, they, more often than not, have no documentation as stipulated under visa requirements and are deemed to be unlawful ‘non-citizens’ according to the Migration Act (1958).

Once these children reach Australian waters, their terror is not alleviated but compounded by mandatory detention, which effectively means that they are incarcerated without any rights. In a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald from a group of concerned doctors, their experience was summed up as follows:

We recently visited children and families in Woomera and Villawood Detention Centres and saw their conditions of detention and the effects of these children first hand. At Woomera, people were introduced to us by a number rather than their name. There was evidence of violence and despair in the filthy bloodstained toilets detainees use. There was no shade or a blade of grass in the compound - Younger children asked us why there were no flowers in Australia. Keeping children in conditions akin to concentration camps is medically and morally wrong.⁵

These children are taken to detention centres because their only crime was to be born during political upheaval and under terrorist regimes. As recent HREOC reports indicate, the conditions that these children exist in are breaching the Conventions on the Right of the Child and Convention on the Status of Refugees. Both of these conventions have been willingly signed and ratified by Australia.

As a part of HREOC’s National Inquiry, officers recently completed a fact-finding mission to Woomera. The five-day assessment was extremely thorough and included interviews with children, children with their family, parents, single men and women. In all, 11 families were interviewed and approximately 20 children.

The official statistics provided to HREOC officers by Australian Correctional Management, the company which operates the migration detention centres, indicated the following incidents of self-harm occurred over a two-week period:

This is a significant proportion of the total child population of 236 at the detention centre. It would indicate that, not unsurprisingly, children are responding to the atmosphere of despair in which they live. It is self-evident that manifestations such as these are likely to permanently mark the psychological outlook of these children. HREOC officers, in discussion with ACM, found no evidence of parents encouraging children to engage in acts of self-harm.

Interviews by HREOC officers with children produced many responses that indicated a propensity for self-harm and suicidal thoughts. For example, officers interviewed a 12-year-old girl who said ‘I am getting crazy, I cut my hand. I can’t talk to my mother. I can’t talk to anyone and I am very tired. There is no solution for me - I just have to commit suicide—there is no choice.’⁶

Defining humanitarianism to a child

Humanitarianism is not a bureaucratic document held in the annals of a government department or a discussion point in parliamentary question time. It is not found on pages and files - it is a living process made up of thousand of humane and socially just acts.

After having lived through the terror of upheaval in the country they were born in and then often travelling for days in demoralising conditions, children asylum seekers don’t care much about the abstract definition of ‘humanity’ - they care to be shown a practical application in the form of a real act of social justice. These acts are based on the core of what is found in the Convention on the Rights of a Child. The Convention outlines that all children, including those in detention will be treated fairly and, according to Dr Ozdowski, it is ‘a powerful piece of legislation, one of the most powerful I have under my responsibility’.

These principles are the basis for socially aware and just acts (small and large) to allow a child unlucky to have been born in the wrong place at the wrong time, to feel they are not bureaucratic non-entities or numbers, but individuals with rights according to international legal and moral conventions.

However, the fact that Australia has ratified a treaty doesn’t automatically incorporate it into Australian domestic law. Like all legal documents, the treaty creates a loophole to relinquish the articles that it contains. Only when treaty provisions are incorporated into Australian law do they create rights in Australia. As such, the current treatment of asylum seeking children is not, technically, illegal. The issue remains about the morality of our current treatment of asylum seekers and their children and how history will judge these actions.

There are also concerns about the future impact on our community, as most of the asylum seekers, eventually, are allowed to remain in the country. ‘Prolonged detention could impact on the development of the child and affect its future chances,’ says Dr Ozdowski. ‘Figures from DIMA [Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs] show that a substantial proportion of asylum seekers are granted refugee status and, as a result, are being released into the community. So it is necessary to ensure that we do not hurt people that are in detention being considered for refugee status.’

Does Australia recognise the vulnerability and special needs of all children?

In a country that professes to care for its children, the Australian community has recently witnessed two examples of ugly politics where party-politics and self-interest has overridden basic human rights and the interests of children - the child sexual abuse cover-up scandals involving the Governor-General, Dr Peter Hollingworth; and the use by the Prime Minister, John Howard, of the ‘children overboard incident’, where children were used mischievously (and as it turned out, incorrectly) in order to gain political advantage.

It is difficult for childcarers and parents to explain to their own children how much they are valued by their community, when the two highest offices in the land show scant regard for children’s concerns, and their government detains children in faraway places, often suffering in oppressive conditions.

Australia’s obligations to all it’s children, including those in detention, are clear—they are based around respect, cultural identity, access to safety and medical and legal services. These are not privileges—they are rights and our government and country are obligated to act on these rights.

Jacqui Everitt, lawyer and activist against refugees in detention asks, ‘is there a country which is prepared to lock up open-endedly children who have been charged with no crime? Is there a country on earth which removes fundamental human rights from all the children of a particular social group? Is there a country or culture that doesn’t recognise the vulnerability and special needs of all children? I feel shame when I answer these questions with a ‘yes’, because the country is mine—Australia.’⁷

On 13 March 2002, a meeting coordinated by Reverend Bill Crews at the Exodus Foundation, involved a range of people, including representation from children’s educational groups and children’s services. It was held to discuss what can be done for children in migration detention and to offer an avenue for of positive ideas. Sadly, many people said ‘I’m here because I am ashamed to be an Australian’. At the meeting, many mothers and childcarers talked about ways of making their own children more tolerant and understanding of the issue in a climate where the media has bombarded them with biased views.

And, ultimately, this understanding and tolerance will enable all children to fully participate in our community, including the children that have been in migration detention. ‘Children are the future,’ says Dr Ozdowski, ‘so we need to ensure that young people develop at their fullest capacity and that they participate fully in our society. They can only do this when they are well looked after, have their emotional needs met and have opportunities that our nation creates around them.’

Alexandra Pitsis is Assistant Editor of Rattler and a freelance writer.

References

1. Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission, National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention, Background Paper 1: Introduction, p.3, (www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/children_detention/background/introduction.html), Sydney, 2002.

2. United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 14, New York, 1948/1993.

3. United Nations, Convention on the Rights of the Child, New York, 1991.

4. ibid., Article 37 (b).

5. Sydney Morning Herald, 22 January 2002.

6. HREOC, Woomera Immigration Detention Centre Report of visit by HREOC Officers, (www.hreoc.gov.au/media_releases), Sydney, 2002.

7. J. Everitt, ‘Children in Detention,’ paper presented at The Refugee Convention: Where to From Here? conference, held at UNSW, December 2001.

RELATED STORIES

Resources and strategies

Home | Members' Site | Forms | Search | Contact | Who We Are | Our Staff | Casual Trainers | Fact Sheets | Training Services | Membership | Rattler Magazine | Broadside Newsletter | Help! Booklets | Publications | Resources | Links

©Community Child Care Co-operative Ltd (NSW)
Addison Road Community Centre, Building 21, 142 Addison Road, Marrickville NSW 2204
Phone: (02) 8922 6444 Fax: (02) 8922 6445

Site programmed and maintained by ARMEDIA