有一个吞了一只苍蝇的老太太:澳大利亚移民法的修正案越来越令人不安

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Lillian Robb
{"title":"有一个吞了一只苍蝇的老太太:澳大利亚移民法的修正案越来越令人不安","authors":"Lillian Robb","doi":"10.1080/1323238X.2022.2130682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Migration Amendment (Clarifying International Obligations for Removal) Act 2021 sought to remedy failures of previous amendments contained in the Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Act 2014. Despite both amendments, the Migration Act 1958 continues to provide for the indefinite detention of non-citizens, an existing human rights concern which the later amending legislation had sought to address. This paper illustrates how the enactment of these amendments constitutes poorly conceived quick fixes that exacerbate rather than remedy Australia’s breaches of international obligations. Akin to the oft repeated nursery rhyme ‘there was an old lady who swallowed a fly’, then a spider to catch the fly, and a bird to catch the spider, the series of amendments discussed fail to address the initial problem—indefinite detention—while each exacerbates that failure with increasingly complex yet ineffective solutions. This paper argues that amending the fundamental failure of the Australian Migration Act to offer protection to non-citizens owed non-refoulement obligations requires more than changes to s 197C introduced in later amendments. It requires changes to the ‘good character’ provisions contained in ss 36 and 501 to ensure that individuals owed non-refoulement obligations by Australia are granted protection visas.","PeriodicalId":37430,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"There was an old lady who swallowed a fly: progressively more troubling amendments to the Australian Migration Act\",\"authors\":\"Lillian Robb\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1323238X.2022.2130682\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Migration Amendment (Clarifying International Obligations for Removal) Act 2021 sought to remedy failures of previous amendments contained in the Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Act 2014. Despite both amendments, the Migration Act 1958 continues to provide for the indefinite detention of non-citizens, an existing human rights concern which the later amending legislation had sought to address. This paper illustrates how the enactment of these amendments constitutes poorly conceived quick fixes that exacerbate rather than remedy Australia’s breaches of international obligations. Akin to the oft repeated nursery rhyme ‘there was an old lady who swallowed a fly’, then a spider to catch the fly, and a bird to catch the spider, the series of amendments discussed fail to address the initial problem—indefinite detention—while each exacerbates that failure with increasingly complex yet ineffective solutions. This paper argues that amending the fundamental failure of the Australian Migration Act to offer protection to non-citizens owed non-refoulement obligations requires more than changes to s 197C introduced in later amendments. It requires changes to the ‘good character’ provisions contained in ss 36 and 501 to ensure that individuals owed non-refoulement obligations by Australia are granted protection visas.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2022.2130682\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2022.2130682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《2021年移民修正案(澄清移民的国际义务)法案》旨在弥补《2014年移民和海事权力立法修正案(解决庇护遗留案件)法案》中先前修正案的失败。尽管有这两项修正案,《1958年移民法》仍然规定无限期拘留非公民,这是一个现有的人权问题,后来的修正立法试图解决这个问题。本文说明了这些修正案的颁布是如何构成构思拙劣的权宜之计,加剧而不是补救澳大利亚违反国际义务的行为。类似于经常被重复的童谣“有一个老太太吞了一只苍蝇”,然后是一只蜘蛛抓苍蝇,一只鸟抓蜘蛛,讨论的一系列修正案未能解决最初的问题——无限期拘留——而每一个都加剧了这个问题,越来越复杂而无效的解决方案。本文认为,修正《澳大利亚移民法》在保护非公民不驱回义务方面的根本失败,需要的不仅仅是在后来的修正案中引入的对第197C条的修改。它要求修改第36条和第501条所载的“良好品格”条款,以确保澳大利亚负有不驱回义务的个人获得保护签证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
There was an old lady who swallowed a fly: progressively more troubling amendments to the Australian Migration Act
ABSTRACT The Migration Amendment (Clarifying International Obligations for Removal) Act 2021 sought to remedy failures of previous amendments contained in the Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Act 2014. Despite both amendments, the Migration Act 1958 continues to provide for the indefinite detention of non-citizens, an existing human rights concern which the later amending legislation had sought to address. This paper illustrates how the enactment of these amendments constitutes poorly conceived quick fixes that exacerbate rather than remedy Australia’s breaches of international obligations. Akin to the oft repeated nursery rhyme ‘there was an old lady who swallowed a fly’, then a spider to catch the fly, and a bird to catch the spider, the series of amendments discussed fail to address the initial problem—indefinite detention—while each exacerbates that failure with increasingly complex yet ineffective solutions. This paper argues that amending the fundamental failure of the Australian Migration Act to offer protection to non-citizens owed non-refoulement obligations requires more than changes to s 197C introduced in later amendments. It requires changes to the ‘good character’ provisions contained in ss 36 and 501 to ensure that individuals owed non-refoulement obligations by Australia are granted protection visas.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Journal of Human Rights
Australian Journal of Human Rights Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Human Rights (AJHR) is Australia’s first peer reviewed journal devoted exclusively to human rights development in Australia, the Asia-Pacific region and internationally. The journal aims to raise awareness of human rights issues in Australia and the Asia-Pacific region by providing a forum for scholarship and discussion. The AJHR examines legal aspects of human rights, along with associated philosophical, historical, economic and political considerations, across a range of issues, including aboriginal ownership of land, racial discrimination and vilification, human rights in the criminal justice system, children’s rights, homelessness, immigration, asylum and detention, corporate accountability, disability standards and free speech.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信