Australia will undermine international agreements to protect refugees if it sends a group of Sri Lankan asylum seekers, all Tamils, who were sailing for Australia back to Indonesia – their last port of call before leaving for Christmas Island – critics warned.
An Australian naval ship intercepted the 83 Sri Lankans and 2 Indonesians in international waters last week heading for Australia.
They are being held on Christmas Island while Canberra decised whether to process them off shore, as asylum seekers typically are, or return them to Indonesia.
But Australia can only return them if Indonesian authorities agreed to apply United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) protocols – which say the men should not be sent back to Sri Lanka if there was a risk they would face persecution.
The UNHCR warned in December that the security situation in Sri Lanka's north and east was so volatile that refugees from those areas, particularly ethnic Tamils, faced serious dangers and persecution.
Indonesia, which is not a signatory to the UNHCR protocols, has indicated that the Tamils would be deported to Sri Lanka immediately, regardless of any concerns for their well-being.
Australia does have alternatives: it still maintains camps for asylum seekers in Papua New Guinea and on the tiny South Pacific island of Nauru, established in 2001 as part of a tougher border protection regime.
Australia’s conservative government, which takes one of the world’s toughest stands against illegal immigration, said a range of options was being examined but that the men would not be sent back to a country where they would face persecution.
“Preliminary discussions have commenced with both Indonesia and Nauru,” Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said.
“While the government is considering options, clearly no action would be taken which would breach our international obligations,” he said.
The Sydney Morning Herald had reported that a secret deal was being struck with Jakarta to send the asylum seekers back to Sri Lanka via Indonesia.
The newspaper said talks took place between Indonesian and Australian law enforcement and immigration officials in Jakarta last Friday, two days after the boat was intercepted.
The Herald quoted Sri Lanka’s ambassador to Indonesia, Major-General (retd) Janaka Perera, as saying that Australia and Indonesia had agreed to assist in the repatriation of the group back to Sri Lanka.
The men on Christmas Island say they fled Sri Lanka as they feared being targeted by Sinhala-dominated security forces because of their Tamil ethnicity.
Minister Andrews said he had been told the two Indonesians were not making claims for protection and wanted to return to Indonesia.
Most of the men being held are in their 20s. One is 17 and is in separate accommodation outside the detention centre and being handled under special guidelines because of his age.
Sri Lankan officials insist the men need not fear being repatriated.
Major-General (retd) Perera said the Tamils would have nothing to fear if they were sent home and added that he would guarantee their safety.
"Sri Lanka's position is that they have traveled illegally to another country and they should be returned to Sri Lanka," he said.
Both Australia and Indonesia had stated they would assist the repatriation, he said.
When asked if the Tamils would be able to apply for asylum in Indonesia, Major-General (retd) Perera told ABC radio: “Asylum for what? On what basis? For economic reasons?”
He insisted Sri Lanka could guarantee the men's safety if they were sent back to Sri Lanka.
"Yes, of course. I mean why should we persecute our own people?" he said.
Major-General (retd) Perera is considered a war criminal by Tamils, as troops under his command have been responsible for numerous human rights abuses including massacres of civilians, torture, summary executions and disappearances.
Australian Greens party leader Bob Brown said Canberra may be acting illegally if it sent the asylum seekers back to Indonesia under these circumstances.
He questioned the involvement of the Ambassador Perera in the reported deal to send the men back to Sri Lanka, where the war between government forces and the Liberation Tigers has escalated in recent months.
"How could we be arranging with him [Perera] for the potential illegal repatriation of these asylum seekers?" Senator Brown asked parliament.
"It would be an outrageous thing for the government to do. They should be brought within Australia's immigration laws and given the rights that are available under those immigration laws."
"Otherwise this country will not only be breaking international law, it'll be turning its back on the very basis of United Nations protection for refugees fleeing violence."
Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett said the men should be given a favourable hearing, particularly in light of reports some may be Tamil people who could be targeted by Sri Lankan government forces.
"There should be no doubt at all about the reasonable prospect that these are genuine claims," he said.
An Australian naval ship intercepted the 83 Sri Lankans and 2 Indonesians in international waters last week heading for Australia.
They are being held on Christmas Island while Canberra decised whether to process them off shore, as asylum seekers typically are, or return them to Indonesia.
But Australia can only return them if Indonesian authorities agreed to apply United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) protocols – which say the men should not be sent back to Sri Lanka if there was a risk they would face persecution.
The UNHCR warned in December that the security situation in Sri Lanka's north and east was so volatile that refugees from those areas, particularly ethnic Tamils, faced serious dangers and persecution.
Indonesia, which is not a signatory to the UNHCR protocols, has indicated that the Tamils would be deported to Sri Lanka immediately, regardless of any concerns for their well-being.
Australia does have alternatives: it still maintains camps for asylum seekers in Papua New Guinea and on the tiny South Pacific island of Nauru, established in 2001 as part of a tougher border protection regime.
Australia’s conservative government, which takes one of the world’s toughest stands against illegal immigration, said a range of options was being examined but that the men would not be sent back to a country where they would face persecution.
“Preliminary discussions have commenced with both Indonesia and Nauru,” Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said.
“While the government is considering options, clearly no action would be taken which would breach our international obligations,” he said.
The Sydney Morning Herald had reported that a secret deal was being struck with Jakarta to send the asylum seekers back to Sri Lanka via Indonesia.
The newspaper said talks took place between Indonesian and Australian law enforcement and immigration officials in Jakarta last Friday, two days after the boat was intercepted.
The Herald quoted Sri Lanka’s ambassador to Indonesia, Major-General (retd) Janaka Perera, as saying that Australia and Indonesia had agreed to assist in the repatriation of the group back to Sri Lanka.
The men on Christmas Island say they fled Sri Lanka as they feared being targeted by Sinhala-dominated security forces because of their Tamil ethnicity.
Minister Andrews said he had been told the two Indonesians were not making claims for protection and wanted to return to Indonesia.
Most of the men being held are in their 20s. One is 17 and is in separate accommodation outside the detention centre and being handled under special guidelines because of his age.
Sri Lankan officials insist the men need not fear being repatriated.
Major-General (retd) Perera said the Tamils would have nothing to fear if they were sent home and added that he would guarantee their safety.
"Sri Lanka's position is that they have traveled illegally to another country and they should be returned to Sri Lanka," he said.
Both Australia and Indonesia had stated they would assist the repatriation, he said.
When asked if the Tamils would be able to apply for asylum in Indonesia, Major-General (retd) Perera told ABC radio: “Asylum for what? On what basis? For economic reasons?”
He insisted Sri Lanka could guarantee the men's safety if they were sent back to Sri Lanka.
"Yes, of course. I mean why should we persecute our own people?" he said.
Major-General (retd) Perera is considered a war criminal by Tamils, as troops under his command have been responsible for numerous human rights abuses including massacres of civilians, torture, summary executions and disappearances.
Australian Greens party leader Bob Brown said Canberra may be acting illegally if it sent the asylum seekers back to Indonesia under these circumstances.
He questioned the involvement of the Ambassador Perera in the reported deal to send the men back to Sri Lanka, where the war between government forces and the Liberation Tigers has escalated in recent months.
"How could we be arranging with him [Perera] for the potential illegal repatriation of these asylum seekers?" Senator Brown asked parliament.
"It would be an outrageous thing for the government to do. They should be brought within Australia's immigration laws and given the rights that are available under those immigration laws."
"Otherwise this country will not only be breaking international law, it'll be turning its back on the very basis of United Nations protection for refugees fleeing violence."
Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett said the men should be given a favourable hearing, particularly in light of reports some may be Tamil people who could be targeted by Sri Lankan government forces.
"There should be no doubt at all about the reasonable prospect that these are genuine claims," he said.
