To strengthen its punitive solutions, the Albanese government recently announced a new $400 million deportation deal with Nauru. This unprecedented and controversial move has drawn intense condemnation from human rights advocates, as well as widespread political opposition. This provision seeks to promote the expeditious removal of people without immigration status in the Australian Community. It uniquely focuses on the NZYQ cohort — a group of about 280 people, including refugees and stateless persons, released from long-term immigration detention in Australia earlier this year.
An especially controversial component of the deal, it came under forceful attack. It builds on last year’s legislation that allowed the government to enter into accords with other countries to facilitate the deportation of people settled in Australia. This legislation touches the lives of the almost 100,000 people on bridging visas who live without protection. It raises very serious issues with the concepts of procedural fairness and natural justice.
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke defended the arrangement, stating that it would “allow the continued management of the NZYQ cohort.” He argued that the people covered by the deal have no legal entitlement to remain in Australia. He continued that a rational migration system must include the exclusion of undocumented persons, those who lack these privileges of citizenship.
“We need to remember that these are people who have no visa right to be in Australia, and any functioning migration system has a principle, which is that if you don’t have a right to be in a country, then you can expect to be removed.” – Tony Burke
Critics contend that the federal government’s actions contradict Australia’s long-stated values of multiculturalism. Greens Senator David Shoebridge, the party’s immigration spokesperson, immediately denounced the deal. He went on to explain that it represents an awful pattern that we’re starting to see in this administration. This pattern involves removing rights and protections for marginalized communities. He contends that the laws extend far past the NZYQ cohort. They have an even greater impact on the larger pool of people on bridging visas.
“We know what the government’s rhetoric is but they’re not telling the truth. These laws apply to up to 100,000 people on bridging visas and without protection in this country; it is not limited to just the NZYQ cohort.” – David Shoebridge
When the deal on deportations was announced, human rights lawyer Alison Battison voiced concern. She continued by insisting that it deprives people of their due process, preventing them from expressing their fear of persecution or request medical needs while being deported. She blasted the timing of the legislation, tying it to an increase in far-right activism against Canada’s multiculturalism.
“On the same week that we are seeing far-right rallies attacking multiculturalism on the streets, we have the Labor party introducing laws in parliament to strip away the rights of natural justice and entering into yet another dehumanising deal with Nauru.” – Alison Battison
The legal framework put in place by last year’s landmark legislation has Executive overreach Judiciary worries. Critics contend that the new laws diminish individuals’ rights to procedural fairness and natural justice, effectively enabling deportations without adequate legal recourse.
“What they’ve now done in the legislation that was introduced last week – that has not yet passed and we would say should not pass – is to take away people’s right to procedural fairness and natural justice.” – Alison Battison
The NZYQ cohort largely includes people with bridging visa Rs. Yes, these visas are granted to individuals with character concerns, but that doesn’t mean they equate to a criminal record. Many people in this cohort might have petty criminal histories or have been rehabilitated for decades. Advocates make the case that deporting these people with no regard for their stories is unjust.
Conservative member of the Australian parliament Julian Leeser strongly argued in favor of the government’s commitment. He argued that the people being deported have no other recourse of appeal and are unable to go back to their country of origin due to prior supreme court rulings. He reasserted the call for repatriation to third countries over indefinite detention.
“These people have no right to remain in Australia. They have exhausted all their avenues of appeal.” – Julian Leeser
Government officials insist that the laws only apply to the NZYQ cohort, critics argue that this assertion is disingenuous. They assert that the legislation’s reach is far wider than anticipated. It would make a world of difference to the thousands of Australians living on bridging visas that crisscross the country.
