Join now to read essay LawQuestion:Critically discuss the treatment of international law within the Australian domestic sphere. In your answer, you should address at least two of the following issues:
Australia’s treatment of asylum seekers,Australia’s shifting attitude towards international treaty monitoring bodies,The relationship between international human rights laws and domestic bills of rights,Questions over the legality of the war in Iraq.The Australian government is inconsistent with its treatment of international law. The government generally adheres to uncontroversial international laws and customs where they are compliant out of necessity. However, the government is only willing to adhere to controversial international law if the relevant international laws are agreeable to its domestic policy. Australia’s shifting adherence to international laws that concern the Iraq war and the treatment of asylum seekers highlight how domestic policy takes greater priority than international law in the Australian domestic sphere. In this
[Page 2]
review the Australia’s approach to the Iraq war. However, we now turn briefly to the treatment of asylum seekers. Australian law, when applied in a humane manner, allows for the establishment and protection of international human rights and the fundamental right to life. However, a fundamental right cannot be established without a fundamental right of privacy. Our analysis is directed at understanding Australian law regarding asylum seekers, including that of asylum seekers. This review has been based on the assessment that there is a substantial proportion of asylum seekers who are living in Australia who do not speak a single language because they are from other states in an attempt to avoid being identified. The Australian government has therefore taken a step towards ensuring, where possible, that those who need protection are classified as refugees. The Australian government is committed to this policy and has done so even in recent times. We find that although the government has sought to restrict the scope of Australian human rights to all persons within the meaning of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, we still have no basis to identify that individual as a refugee under the Australian law for purposes of international recognition of asylum seekers.
[Page 3]
The use of international law as it relates to asylum seekers is particularly objectionable, and the Australian government continues to fail to recognise that some individuals who have been refugees for less than ten years and would be regarded as refugees, who will otherwise be considered refugees should be treated accordingly. Australian law does not recognize a refugee’s right of life for reasons of security within Australian territory as being relevant to national security or security interests elsewhere in the world or in Australia, and Australia does not recognise Australia’s right to claim refugee status in its national interests.
The Australian government continues to ignore the fundamental right of the refugee to have the necessary legal safeguards to ensure that he or she lives in Australia, and this is particularly objectionable when considered in light of the humanitarian concerns faced by refugees.
[Page 4]
[Page 5]
In Australia, the protection of asylum seekers comes primarily from the International Convention or Article 11 on the Rights of the Child of a State or Territory. A child who has a family member who has the right to be a refugee falls under the protection that is available to that child under national law. However, in order to ensure asylum seekers have the legal protection of their family member and to protect that right we refer to it as “non-refoulement”.
[Page 6]
Australian human rights law does not recognise UNHCR’s commitment to universal human rights in the refugee community, and we understand that the UN has raised the possibility of a resolution to the conflict in Myanmar in December of 2013, and there is still little to be done to resolve the conflict diplomatically or economically, for that matter. We do not recognise UNHCR’s obligation when this is in doubt.
[Page 7]
The Australia’s approach to the Iraq war gives the Australian government the opportunity to offer to UNHCR aid that is sufficiently reliable, safe and inclusive. This is particularly problematic when it comes to the treatment of asylum seekers from countries of non-compliance with the UNHCR’s humanitarian guidelines. However, under international human rights law, Australia generally recognizes that it cannot accept refugees and provides support to those refugees to which it does not have the legal support of other countries. The Australian government attempts to circumvent the provision of legal aid to refugees that is in a state of contravention to international humanitarian law
[Page 2]
review the Australia’s approach to the Iraq war. However, we now turn briefly to the treatment of asylum seekers. Australian law, when applied in a humane manner, allows for the establishment and protection of international human rights and the fundamental right to life. However, a fundamental right cannot be established without a fundamental right of privacy. Our analysis is directed at understanding Australian law regarding asylum seekers, including that of asylum seekers. This review has been based on the assessment that there is a substantial proportion of asylum seekers who are living in Australia who do not speak a single language because they are from other states in an attempt to avoid being identified. The Australian government has therefore taken a step towards ensuring, where possible, that those who need protection are classified as refugees. The Australian government is committed to this policy and has done so even in recent times. We find that although the government has sought to restrict the scope of Australian human rights to all persons within the meaning of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, we still have no basis to identify that individual as a refugee under the Australian law for purposes of international recognition of asylum seekers.
[Page 3]
The use of international law as it relates to asylum seekers is particularly objectionable, and the Australian government continues to fail to recognise that some individuals who have been refugees for less than ten years and would be regarded as refugees, who will otherwise be considered refugees should be treated accordingly. Australian law does not recognize a refugee’s right of life for reasons of security within Australian territory as being relevant to national security or security interests elsewhere in the world or in Australia, and Australia does not recognise Australia’s right to claim refugee status in its national interests.
The Australian government continues to ignore the fundamental right of the refugee to have the necessary legal safeguards to ensure that he or she lives in Australia, and this is particularly objectionable when considered in light of the humanitarian concerns faced by refugees.
[Page 4]
[Page 5]
In Australia, the protection of asylum seekers comes primarily from the International Convention or Article 11 on the Rights of the Child of a State or Territory. A child who has a family member who has the right to be a refugee falls under the protection that is available to that child under national law. However, in order to ensure asylum seekers have the legal protection of their family member and to protect that right we refer to it as “non-refoulement”.
[Page 6]
Australian human rights law does not recognise UNHCR’s commitment to universal human rights in the refugee community, and we understand that the UN has raised the possibility of a resolution to the conflict in Myanmar in December of 2013, and there is still little to be done to resolve the conflict diplomatically or economically, for that matter. We do not recognise UNHCR’s obligation when this is in doubt.
[Page 7]
The Australia’s approach to the Iraq war gives the Australian government the opportunity to offer to UNHCR aid that is sufficiently reliable, safe and inclusive. This is particularly problematic when it comes to the treatment of asylum seekers from countries of non-compliance with the UNHCR’s humanitarian guidelines. However, under international human rights law, Australia generally recognizes that it cannot accept refugees and provides support to those refugees to which it does not have the legal support of other countries. The Australian government attempts to circumvent the provision of legal aid to refugees that is in a state of contravention to international humanitarian law