The People’s Inquiry into Detention: Social work activism for asylum seeker rights

Abstract

In 2008, findings from the People’s Inquiry into Detention were published as Human Rights Overboard: Seeking Asylum in Australia. The People’s Inquiry, led by social work academics in Australia, exposed injustices within Australia’s privatised detention network for asylum seekers and interrogated policies and practices that ensued since mandatory immigration detention was introduced by legislation in 1992. With reference to the global context, the article presents a snapshot of policies and practices revealed by the People’s Inquiry that were considered antithetical to human rights and discusses this extensive undertaking within a broader context of asylum seeker social movements and professional advocacy endeavours that continue as harsh policies escalate. The article speaks to the resilience of the asylum seeker movement, often against the odds, a movement that includes responsive and tenacious professional groups.

COVID-19, migration and inclusive cities through e-governance: strategies to manage asylum seekers in Durban, South Africa

“…Finally, while boarder closures or restrictions may be justified as a measure to curb the spread of COVID-19, there are no exceptions in law or in practice to safeguard the basic rights of asylum seekers (Briskman, 2020). This creates the serious risk of violation of the rights of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees (Molobe et al , 2020).…”

“…Despite reasons for migration, once a person has immigrated, their details must be captured in a national registry system by a relevant government department, whose primary responsibility is to document immigrants for their own records, planning and national security, among other aspects (Paquet, 2020). Briskman (2020) defined asylum seekers as migrants who leave their country of origin because of conflict, political instability, crime, hunger or economic instability and seek refuge in another country. Kenny and Miller (2020) noted that individuals who leave their country of origin for various reasons are processed in their host country, where their details are captured on a national database and they are given temporary residence permits that are renewed periodically while awaiting adjudication of their asylum status.…”

Health professionals confront the intentional harms of indefinite immigration detention: an Australian overview, evaluation of alternative responses and proposed strategy

“…This leads to post-event (rather than immediate) spiritualexistential questioning and mental health symptoms (Barnes et al, 2019). The immigration detention system, as noted, subordinates HP independence to state priorities: expecting HPs to tolerate sub-standard care, violating patients' health-care rights and HPs' professional standards (Briskman, 2019). Creating a potential 'slippery slope', it accelerates moral injury via association with coercive, abusive encounters, allowing harms (Jansen et al, 2018) and failing to protect those engulfed by them.…”

“…Australia provides the most extreme example of restrictive immigration control (Kaldor Centre, 2019;Briskman, 2019). Its bipartisan centrepiece, indefinite administrative detention, dates from 1992 to 1993.…”

The Border Harms of Human Displacement: Harsh Landscapes and Human Rights Violations

“…Bhambra (2017) emphasizes that Europe, the wealthiest continent in the world, hosts fewer refugees per population than any other. Moreover, the majority of refugees today relocate to neighbouring states, so relatively poor countries accommodate most of them (Briskman 2020). In fact, the Global South is providing most protection for displaced people.…”