Regarding 'the Moral of the Manus Island Story'
Letter to the Editor - The Age
13 February 2004
Dear Sir/Madam
Your editorial (The Moral of the Manus Island story, 13 February), like many reports on this issue does not reflect the facts.
Seeking asylum isn't about travelling the globe until you find somewhere you would like to settle. It is reasonable to expect an asylum seeker to take the first opportunity they can outside their home country to present their case to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees or the relevant national authorities.
The key issue is whether any protection had to be provided to Mr Sisalem in Australia. Papua New Guinea, where he went before coming to Australia and which is also a signatory to the Refugees Convention, was prepared to accept him back and any asylum claims could be addressed in that country.
We have been advised that Mr Sisalem had access to UNHCR refugee determination processes in several other countries before illegally entering Australia. He applied for refugee status in both Indonesia and PNG but did not proceed with either.
After his return to PNG, the UNHCR assessed his case and has now concluded that, because he is a Palestinian, he is entitled to refugee protection. UNHCR will seek resettlement options for him as they do for so many others.
Whether or not he is resettled in Australia is irrelevant. He has had access to a refugee determination process and now has access to appropriate protection as is required under the UN Convention. He would receive no more or less if the process was undertaken in Australia.
Further, it is a ridiculous argument to trot out figures of $1.3 million and daily costs of keeping this man on Manus. The centre is being kept in operational readiness. The fact that the PNG authorities have accommodated him there is incidental to Australia's costs.
Stewart Foster
Director
Public Affairs
DIMIA