The National ResearchInstitute weighed outthe positive and negatives ofthe Asylum seeker issue.
National ResearchInstitute’s Gande James commentary starts off withthe negative implications:
First,there are no proper institutional mechanisms put in place to regulatethe effects ofthe arrangement. For example,there are no separate laws likethe Asylum Seeker Act to deal with any issues of asylum seekers.
Those who are granted refugee status will not enjoy allthe human rights owed tothem underthe refugee convention. He says violence is endemic in PNG so refugees will not be physically safe.
He talks aboutthe lack of services giventhe chronic poverty in PNG andthe lack of capacity ofthPNG government and its institutions.
He saysthe deal is againstInternational Law and ther supporting legislation.
For example, Australia is likely to violate Article 31 ofthe refugee convention not to penalize an asylum seeker on account of his or her “illegal” mode of entry to Australia.
He sayPNG does not need extra money or aid to enhance its economic development. The negative repercussions need to be carefully considered.
The Memorandum of Understanding covers 24 key areas includingthe right for Australia to transfer refugees from Australia tPNG, and processing centres may be built anywhere in PNG
The MOU may jointly be altered ifthe need arises.
Pictured: Prime Minister Peter O'Neill and Kevin Rudd signingthe Asylum Centre Deall.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MI_318dfGBe%3Ffeature%3Doembed%26wmode%3Dopaque%26showinfo%3D0%26showsearch%3D0%26rel%3D0
previous post