Australia responsible for arbitrary detention of asylum seekers, UN committee finds

Australia has been accused of trying to “escape its human rights responsibility” after a UN committee found it was responsible for arbitrary detention of asylum seekers in Nauru.

The UN Human Rights Committee monitors how countries fulfil their human rights obligations under international law.

It was reviewing two cases involving asylum seekers, including minors, who were kept at Australia’s notorious offshore processing centre in Nauru despite getting refugee status under the former Coalition government.

They filed complaints with the committee, claiming the Australian government breached its commitments to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Australian officials have argued Canberra was not responsible for the violation because it happened in another jurisdiction.

But the UN review found Australia had “effective control” of its offshore detention centre.

“A State party cannot escape its human rights responsibility when outsourcing asylum processing to another State,” Committee member Mahjoub El Haiba said in statement.

“Where a State exercises effective control over an area, its obligations under international law remain firmly in place and cannot be transferred.”

One case involved 24 unaccompanied minors from Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Myanmar.

They were intercepted en route to Australia and taken to Christmas Island between 2013 and 2014 and held in mandatory detention for between two and 12 months.

They were transferred in 2014 to Nauru, where they suffered from an array of physical and mental health problems, including renal problems and self-harm.

The Nauru centre was severely overcrowded at the time and detainees survived in squalid conditions.

All but one got refugee status in September 2014, but their detention in Nauru continued.

The other case involved an Iranian woman who sought asylum in Australia.

She arrived on Christmas Island along with her husband and several relatives in August 2013.

She was transferred to Nauru in early 2014 and recognised as a refugee in April 2017.

It was not until November 2018 that she was transferred to the Australian mainland for medical reasons.

But even in Australia, authorities still held her in detention facilities.

The committee found that because Australia built the Nauru centre and wholly paid for its operation, it was responsible for what happened there.

“It was established that Australia had significant control and influence over the regional processing facility in Nauru, and thus we consider that the asylum seekers in those cases were within the State party’s jurisdiction under the ICCPR,” Mr El Haiba said.

“These decisions send a clear message to all States: Where there is power or effective control, there is responsibility.

“The outsourcing of operations does not absolve States of accountability.

“Offshore detention facilities are not human-rights-free zones for the State party, which remains bound by the provisions of the covenant.”

More than 200 Rohingya came ashore over the weekend in Indonesia's Aceh province, officials said on Monday (January 6), amid growing numbers of arrivals to the country by sea of the stateless population.

A Home Affairs spokesperson told NewsWire the department was “considering the committee’s views on each matter and will provide its responses in due course”.

“It has been the Australian government’s consistent position that Australia does not exercise effective control over regional processing centres,” the spokesperson said.

“We welcome Nauru’s continued partnership in the effective delivery of regional processing arrangements.

“Nauru as a sovereign State continues to exercise jurisdiction over the regional processing arrangements (and individuals subject to those arrangements) within their territory, to be managed and administered in accordance with their domestic law and international human rights obligations.

“Transferees who are outside of Australia’s territory or its effective control do not engage Australia’s international obligations.”