On this day in 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Today, on the 70th anniversary of Human Rights Day, I couldn’t think of anything more pertinent to discuss.
When it comes to people seeking asylum in Australia, we have lost our way: we have lost the checks and balances that we expect from a system of democratic governance based on a separation of powers. We have not only entered, but are well advanced into the frightening realm of authoritarianism.
Fundamentally, the problem lies in that Australia is now one of the few countries in the Western world that does not have a bill of rights either in its constitution or its national laws. It therefore makes it harder to use the courts to explicitly defend the human rights of people seeking asylum, leaving them directly exposed to almost unchecked executive power.
I am seeing the most compelling humanitarian circumstances imaginable routinely refused or not even referred to the Minister for consideration under these powers. I am seeing people whose lives are hanging in the balance being arbitrarily cast off without remedy and sent back to countries and situations which the Minister knows they are unlikely to survive.
I find it is so shameful and grating to be a citizen of a wealthy and democratic country like Australia that has shown that it can, if it chooses, be a world leader in refugee resettlement processes, but has instead become such a blatant (and even proud) abuser of rights of people seeking asylum.
We see mind-boggling sums of taxpayers’ money continuously pumped in to prop up the domestic and regional system of detention that offends basic human rights of people seeking asylum and dignity. We see a government willing to routinely make decisions that put lives at risk, claiming to the public that these policies are necessary to save lives.
Many days I wake up feeling that I must be mad or in a bad dream — how did it come to this? I find it so difficult to explain this to my children, who have lived with me overseas for much of the last 16 years in poor countries, such as Jordan, with very limited resources who have still managed to absorb great numbers of refugees, often over long periods of time.
Now back in Australia, I’m fighting against this injustice. It is often a dirty fight. When politicians fail us, we must go to the courts, and we must go time and time again. This is what we, as a community of lawyers (of which I’m so proud to be a part) are doing. We recognise that the struggle for the rights of people seeking asylum is not only a struggle for the thousands of people already harmed or those who will be harmed in the future, but is in fact one of those defining struggles for the soul of our nation.
So where does this leave us? We clearly need to be doing much more. Every time there’s a change, which is invariably negative, I think to myself “we must be at rock bottom now”, but somehow there’s always still a lower point to which we descend. We need strategies on multiple levels (legal, social, political, economic) and we need to involve as many different levels of society as possible in our struggle. We must fight in the courts, in the parliament and most importantly, demand that every community and person across the land ask themselves “am I okay with this?”
Dr. Carolyn Graydon is Principal Solicitor at the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre. She was not paid for this piece. You can donate now to the ASRC appeal to help people seeking asylum fight against injustice.
It has been state that there are 65.6 million refugees globally at the moment. There are likely many more people would leave their jurisdiction of possible.
How many of these, exactly, will ensure a restoration of our soul? And what financial support would be considered reasonable for each of these people?
The UDHR is arguably not even close to truly universal. That stems from whence it came – the Atlantic Charter.
The Atlantic Charter seeded the United Nations, which flowed on to the UDHR.
The Atlantic Charter was a US/Brit JV, led by FDR and Churchill, and they built in some ‘malware’.
This is another ‘celebration’ of the 70th birthday of the UDHR, and is written by Ajamu Baraka, long time political activist and justice seeker, and former V-P candidate alongside Jill Stein’s Presidential candidacy for the Green Party.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/12/07/the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights-at-70-time-to-de-colonize-human-rights/
Here’s the ‘malware’;
“The Atlantic Charter served as the basis for the Declaration of the United Nations, in January 1942 by twenty-six nations then at war and subsequently by twenty-one other nations. The Declaration endorsed the Atlantic Charter and expressed the conviction that complete victory over their enemies is essential to defend life, liberty, independence and religious freedom, and to preserve human rights and justice in their own lands as well as in other lands.
Finally, many of the colonial subjects believed the principles of the war and the fight against racism and white dominance in Europe would allow all still colonized, and denied national democratic rights, to assume a new status as full human beings and exercise national rights just like white Europeans.
However, Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the British and U.S. leaders made it clear that the principles in the Atlantic Charter did not apply to colonial subjects in colonial territories but only to those nations in Europe under the “Nazi yoke”.”
Enduring, the ‘malware’.
You preferred the situation when thousands were drowning at sea? Interesting
Your blinkered, philistine pig-ignorance is interesting Tony.
Back to the Australian or Spectator with you….
Tony . . . “Your veils, my friend, are the habits you endlessly weave around yourself. The unknown frightens you, and you cannot cease from closing the gaps.” – Faouzi Skali. A 20th Century Sufi teacher, cultural visionary. A man of action, he launched International Conferences to promote dialogue.
Stand tall Carolyn. You are neither mad, nor is the inhumanity a dream.
Would that be Tony as in Burke – declaring discussion of the issue not on for Labor?
I believe we are the only western country without protection in a Bill of Rights or equivalent. I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why our literally exceptional status somehow improves the position of Australians or, as in your example, asylum seekers.
Since “9/11” we have enacted more than 600 pieces of legislation that impinge on our liberties, often, as with the latest encryption debacle, to a frightening degree. This is compounded by an electoral system that elects Senators who barely scrape double figures in their primary vote. I know of no other western country that is inflicted with such a system. When popular support is measured against seats won (in both houses) then it is a stretch to even call it a democracy.
The problem is compounded when the “Opposition” sings from the same song sheet about “national security”, the fighting of America’s wars, and voting in the UN on issues such as Palestine that are inexplicable in the light of our professed devotion to the “rules based international order.”
James, if you’re the James O’Neill I think you are, you might be interested in the contents of the comment I made earlier, which references another piece ‘celebrating’ the 70th birthday of the UDHR.
Given the moderators are currently holding the comment hostage (for ‘moderation’), you can find the piece at Counterpunch, from Friday, written by Ajamu Baraka – it is excellent.
“Universality” is not what it seems, and very much by design – FDR’s and Churchill’s design.
I am utterly appalled at the way our politicians are treating asylum seekers and refugees. It is certainly not OK with me. Individual politicians who are responsible for this inhumane treatment shoul be persecuted by our justice system.