Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Child-Proofing Asylum: Separated Children and Refugee Decision Making in Australia

Child-Proofing Asylum: Separated Children and Refugee Decision Making in Australia Over recent years, the number of separated children seeking asylum in Australia has dramatically increased. This article contends that the Australian refugee determination system fails to fulfil Australia’s international human rights obligations to separated asylum seeker children as it is ill-equipped to facilitate their participation, or to arrive at quick and durable solutions guided by their best interests. Rather, Australia’s present system indirectly discriminates against separated children, as compared to adult asylum seekers, through its lack of child-inclusive law and procedure and child-focused outcomes. Of particular concern is the current conflict of interest attaching to the Federal Minister for Immigration and Citizenship’s dual, yet contradictory, role as guardian of separated children seeking asylum in Australia and final arbiter of their immigration status. Although, perhaps most alarming is the lack of any guardian for separated children who attempt to travel to Australia by boat.This article proposes solutions drawn from Australia’s human rights obligations to separated children, including international best-practice standards and procedures. If Australia were to fulfil its international commitments to separated children, this would go some way towards empowering these children to participate on an equal footing with their adult counterparts; and to reaching durable solutions in the best interests of the child. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Refugee Law Oxford University Press

Child-Proofing Asylum: Separated Children and Refugee Decision Making in Australia

International Journal of Refugee Law , Volume 25 (3) – Oct 25, 2013

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/child-proofing-asylum-separated-children-and-refugee-decision-making-PzqJ4tGnyX

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author (2013). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com
Subject
Original Manuscript
ISSN
0953-8186
eISSN
1464-3715
DOI
10.1093/ijrl/eet037
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Over recent years, the number of separated children seeking asylum in Australia has dramatically increased. This article contends that the Australian refugee determination system fails to fulfil Australia’s international human rights obligations to separated asylum seeker children as it is ill-equipped to facilitate their participation, or to arrive at quick and durable solutions guided by their best interests. Rather, Australia’s present system indirectly discriminates against separated children, as compared to adult asylum seekers, through its lack of child-inclusive law and procedure and child-focused outcomes. Of particular concern is the current conflict of interest attaching to the Federal Minister for Immigration and Citizenship’s dual, yet contradictory, role as guardian of separated children seeking asylum in Australia and final arbiter of their immigration status. Although, perhaps most alarming is the lack of any guardian for separated children who attempt to travel to Australia by boat.This article proposes solutions drawn from Australia’s human rights obligations to separated children, including international best-practice standards and procedures. If Australia were to fulfil its international commitments to separated children, this would go some way towards empowering these children to participate on an equal footing with their adult counterparts; and to reaching durable solutions in the best interests of the child.

Journal

International Journal of Refugee LawOxford University Press

Published: Oct 25, 2013

There are no references for this article.