The Government's decision to suspend the processing of future asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Sri Lanka raises many questions. As always when there are many possible points of discussion, it is important to ask what matters. In this case what matters is that asylum seekers find respect for their human dignity in ways consistent with Australia's proper responsibilities and interests.
This decision does not respect the dignity of asylum seekers. One of the reasons given for the delay in processing is that it will deter others from coming by boat to seek asylum in Australia. The tired and brutal logic of deterrence involves inflicting avoidable suffering on an innocent group of people in order to send a message to others. It treats human beings as things, and is inherently lacking in respect.
Not only the reason for the decision, but also the suffering entailed by delayed processing diminishes the humanity of asylum seekers. The delay will extend the time they spend in detention. My experience over many years as chaplain in a small detention centre is that most asylum seekers (who come by air) arrive alert and with bright eyes. After three months their eyes become opaque and they are often frustrated and angry. After six months they become listless and show signs of depression.
Those working with refugees commonly say that the effects of detention do not end when they gain residence, but still impair their lives many years afterwards. As Australian of the Year, Dr Pat McGorry said detentions centres are factories for producing mental illnesses. And that, despite the best efforts of staff in the centres.
The human cost of delay will be ravaged lives and greater callousness directed towards them. This was nicely symbolised in the simultaneous decision to send federal police to Christmas Island to deal with the aftermath of the decision.
The decision also raises larger questions whether the processes for determining asylum seekers' claim to protection on Christmas Island guarantee respect for their human dignity. Respect centrally involves fairness. At present Australian policies towards people who arrive by boat to claim asylum are quite unsatisfactory, although, in contrast with the previous government, they are administered in a generally fair way. But the decisions made by Government officers and the review of negative decisions are not subject to statutory review. The justice of the decisions depends on government and ministerial good will, not on law.
Now that the Government has