The Rohingyas are one of the most persecuted minorities in the world. Democracies ignore their plight and they have been discriminated against for decades. Rohingyas have effectively stateless since the passing of the Myanmar's 1982 citizenship law. The Myanmar government does not recognize the Rohingya as an ethnic group, instead insisting they are Bengali economic migrants. In Febuary this year it declared that Rohingya "is terminology which has never been included among over 100 national races of Myanmar (Burma)". (http://www.theweek.co.uk/63745/the-rohingya-boat-crisis-why-refugees-are-fleeing-burma) Recently, in the Buddhist dominant Myanmar, there has been Buddhist attacks against the Rohingya Muslims. The cause of the attacks sparked …show more content…
I feel that this is necessary in the long term, because the only way to stop more Rohingya migrants from leaving Myanmar and Bangladesh would be to state firmly that any more boats will be pushed away and not allowed to enter the ASEAN countries. Australia shares the same views and feels that although the Rohingya migrants should be treated with decency and humanity, but if more migrants are going to flee Myanmar or Bangladesh to go to other ASEAN countries, it will be putting economic strain on these countries. As these countries cannot be inevitably accepting many more migrants, more of them will die at sea. …show more content…
This economic supports can be channeled towards the creation of facilities, and the provision of food, water, shelter and other emergency needs, to house the thousands of people who have been stranded on sea and accepted into Malaysia and
Some of this individuals needed to surrender such resources just to get out from their nation. On the off chance that they will do such things, that clearly implies the issue might be considerably more genuine than we might suspect, most likely they don 't have a decision and do this or presumably not, in any case, we can 't simply remain by and let this individual battle for their essential freedom. If we need to see a change, the Australian government need to manage this issue in like manner and attempt to search for an answer this issue would advantage us as well as advantage them as
Canada and the United States started large and successful international agreement and discussion during 1965 (source 4). Australia and the rest of the world forcibly constrained the amount of unregistered migrants from the Vietnamese war zone. An Orderly Departure Program was put into action to regulate the amount of registered Vietnamese migrants into countries all around the world especially Australia. Overall all Vietnamese migrants that arrived in Australia have a say in government and are appointed a representative in the Upper house in Canberra and Western Australia (source 4). As the numbers of Vietnamese migrants increased they were apprehended and then accepted in later
‘The Tampa Decision: Examining the Australian Government’s prerogative power to detain and expel unlawful non-citizens in 2001’ The executive power of the Commonwealth has largely been neglected, both by the High Court and by commentators, receiving scant attention in comparison with the Commonwealth 's legislative and judicial powers. However, it was just fourteen years ago, in 2001, when a Norwegian cargo vessel MV Tampa being denied entry into Australia after rescuing 438 asylum seekers sparked one of the most controversial yet illuminating civil cases in Australian legal history. The result was a civil suit (Ruddock vs Vadarlis 2001) in which the Federal Government successfully appealed the initial ruling to the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia, where it was found that the government does indeed possess a prerogative power to prevent the entry of non-citizens into
Should the Australian Government keep stopping the boats or start welcome and letting more asylum seekers into Australia?
Not only is the Government not adhering to Article 27, the Government have now implemented The Australian Border Force Act which has made it impossible for the workers to report the abuse the children are suffering on Nauru, this is not welfare. This has made it possible for the Government to cover the facts and persuade the people of Australian to believe the new information, and take away the children’s’
This very situation coincidentally happened with the migrants of the Dust Bowl, “Roosevelt’s Farm Security Administration built 13 camps, each temporarily housing 300 families in tents” (PBS). While the current situation is not being funded by the Syrian or African government, it is still better than sleeping on the streets of a foreign country in Europe. The commonalities between the situations can also give the people a peace of mind by seeing how the United States has rebounded from this disaster. The United States is currently stepping into the situation across seas helping people rebound from the horrific scene. There are people who are overjoyed by the opportunities that the United
The treatment of refugees and asylum seekers in Australia is unacceptable and with mandatory detention it makes matters even worse. The treatment that families and children go through is a monstrosity. All of the reasons that have been listed is why ‘If I could change one thing about Australia’ it would be changing the way refugees are treated here and making them feel safe in Australia by connecting them to the
Introduction Australia is said to be a multicultural and multiracial country. So why can’t we, as a country and as a nation, say yes to immigrants fleeing from a different country? As immigration to Australia is supposably apart of our history and it would be wrong not to continue on with the actions of our ancestors. Paragraph 1 As of 2014 – 2015, Australia accepted 13,750 refugees in total. Paragraph 2 • What are refugees and asylum seekers?
Australia has been labelled as the country of mateship, fair-go and tolerance, but the mistreatment of Asylum seekers in Australia denies these values. In our anthem we sing “For those who’ve come across the seas, we’ve boundless plains to share”. It ironic isn’t it? As when Asylum seekers arrive in Australia we do not offer a hand of mateship instead we use punitive matters such as sending them to mandatory detention, which shows how xenophobia is manifested in Australia (Ariyawansa,
This analysis looks at refugees and the social justice issue of Australia’s discriminatory treatment of refugees traveling to Australia seeking asylum. Australia’s current treatment of Asylum seekers includes taking them from an already extremely stressful environment and detaining them in remote detention facilities where they have limited interaction with family and friends. In some instances, this includes children and young people. The University western Sydney (2016)
In Australia, refugees and asylum seekers are treated like the enemy in a war: the target of a highly resourced, military-led “deterrence” strategy complete with arbitrary detainment, detention camps, guards to terrorise them, forced deportations and the violent suppression of those who protest. Australia is failing to meet the standards required when regarding the treatment of asylum seekers. It is fact that asylum seekers make up less than 3% of Australia’s annual immigration yet the idea is being distorted to that of which they will overpopulate a country that prides itself on being a multicultural society. I want to shed light on the misconception that asylum seekers are not ‘legal’ when in actual fact it is a human right to seek freedom.
Families entering the refuge countries suffer from displacement and separation, grief and mental agony, gross violence in their countries of origin and are needy, helpless and vulnerable who need to be taken care of. Australia for example has ratified numerous
Somali Refugees In American Since about the late 1900’s Somali Refugees have been coming to the United States in hope for a better lifestyle than they had at home with famine and war. Somali refugees are brought to the U.S. by different organizations that support families from other countries that have had a hard life styles and isn’t easy living in their home country. They arrive in the U.S. being new to the country and not having much understanding of the daily living and also feeling unsettled.
Not only that, but they do it by the millions, moving in independent crowds step by step on the grounds that there is security (Acuesta, 2017). The explanations for their movement include issues such as social, racial, religious and political persecution, war, climate change, hunger and gender orientation. These vulnerable refugees have no other choice than to seek protection and we are denying their human rights and stripping away their human dignity. A United Nations Refugee Agency survey conducted in Australia in 2011 showed that 35% of people favoured turning back boats or detention of arrivals and deportation, while only 22% favoured eligibility for permanent settlement. Clearly there is much controversy surrounding this issue as it can create many effects within a nations, both positive and negative.
Growing up at a refugee camp in a very poor country is not what an average child has to go through. In Nepal we did not have much shelter to live by. We were given some bamboos, thatch and some rope to build up our home and once a month they would give us some rice. I grew up without electricity therefore television was very rare to me. I was born at the house made up of bamboo and thatch rather than a proper hospital with some form of professional care.