Refugee and migrant issues have returned to the forefront of Australian politics and media over the past month. The renewed focus follows the High Court’s recent ruling that the government cannot indefinitely detain a non-citizen if there is no real prospect of their removal from Australia. This decision was historic: the entire Australian detention industry relies on keeping people in indefinite detention, and this ruling undermines its legitimacy and justification.
For decades, refugees within the Australian detention system — for many of whom their “crime” is seeking shelter from persecution — have experienced psychological torture due to their indefinite incarceration. This nation’s system controls time to exert pressure on refugees, with detainees often unable to identify how long they will stay in the prison camps, or if their imprisonment will end at all, compelling them to return to their countries of origin as their only exit.
Following the High Court’s decision, it became evident how the major parties would react, with Labor and the Coalition hastily drafting emergency legislation that involved requiring freed migrants to wear electronic tracking bracelets and comply with curfews. And last Wednesday, new laws were rushed through to allow for the preventative detention of certain released detainees labelled the “worst of the worst”.
These hurried-through laws affect not only the detainees released following the High Court decision, but also refugees previously permitted to live in Australia. Regarding the enforced ankle bracelets, these freed individuals must carry a piece of prison with them in the community, remaining under surveillance. As Isabelle Reinecke wrote in Crikey, some refugees can experience harrowing PTSD when forced to wear restraints such as ankle bracelets, and already there are several High Court challenges to the new requirements.
Of the detainees released, so far six have been arrested following their release. Yet of the remaining cohort, Immigration Minister Andrew Giles refuses to say how many have criminal convictions or offer any detail on their cases. This lack of information has led to the media following Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s lead, peddling his propaganda as he criminalises the narrative. Labor has in turn displayed no agency or independence, and has hastily bowed to this combined pressure as it puts managing the political fallout first.
When a humanitarian case becomes highly politicised, the use of language becomes crucial. We’ve witnessed how the media has adopted language created by figures like Dutton, with headlines full of words like “criminals”, “refugees”, “safety”, “fear” and “community protection”. This language shapes public perception, and readers and audiences often lack adequate information about how many of these cases involve serious crimes or the details surrounding them. Indeed, there is consistently a general lack of acknowledgment that thousands of refugees have been living peacefully in the community for years.
Labor and the Coalition have demonstrated their ability to enact stringent measures against refugees, but it is important to know this is not just about passing legislation — these measures fortify a more robust dictatorial system against refugees and migrants. We observe two systems: one within the legal framework for ordinary citizens, and another outside it that enables punishment for some refugees without cause or accountability.
In Australia, regardless of the many disagreements between Labor and the Coalition, when it comes to refugees, they always unite. I call it a “competition of cruelty”, where both vie to convey to the public that they are the stricter on these issues. In this cruel race, as always, the winner is the Coalition, particularly Dutton, who has seized a significant opportunity to poison the discourse further and once again dominate Labor.
It is clear that the major parties’ reaction to the High Court’s decision demonstrates that Australia has not learnt anything from decades of inflicting tragedy against refugees.
What have you made of the way Labor has handled the issue of indefinite detention? Readers, we want to hear from you — especially while our comments are closed due to our website upgrade. Send us your thoughts on this article to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
