HREOC Website: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
Transcript of Hearing -
SYDNEY
TUESDAY 16 JULY 2002
Please
note: This is an edited transcript
DR SEV OZDOWSKI,
Human Rights Commissioner
MRS ROBIN SULLIVAN,
Queensland Children's Commissioner
PROFESSOR TRANG
THOMAS, Professor of Psychology
Melbourne Institute of Technology
MS VANESSA LESNIE,
Secretary to the Inquiry
AVILLION HOTEL
BALLROOM 3
DR OZDOWSKI:
It is 9.30 so we will start another day off, formal hearings. My name
is Dr Sev Ozdowski and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner. To my right
is Dr Trang Thomas, Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute
of Technology and to my left Mrs Robin Sullivan, Queensland's Children's
Commissioner. Both of them do assist me with the Inquiry as Assistant
Commissioners. Also, on my left Ms Vanessa Lesnie who is Secretary to
the Inquiry.
Before I start listening
to the witnesses I would like to stress that it's important to respect
the privacy of individuals and in particular children and therefore I'm
asking the witnesses and the media not to identify asylum seekers, not
to disclose their names, and also not to identify any other persons and
also when taking shots of the background if there are people who wouldn't
like to be in the shots please respect their wishes.
Now, I would like
to invite Dr Bernice Pfitzner as the first witness to come forward. Yes
please take a seat over there. Thank you very much for your submission
provided to the Inquiry and for the sworn evidence provided to the Inquiry.
The role of this hearing is to test the evidence you provide us with and
to elicit further information which would be helpful for the Inquiry.
If you would like to submit any additional evidence in any time in the
future please contact us in writing. If you would like to provide any
names which can't be mentioned publicly please talk to the Inquiry Secretary.
Now I would like to ask you to take an oath or affirmation.
PFITZNER, sworn [9.32am]
MEDICAL PRACTITIONER AT WOOMERA DETENTION CENTRE OCTOBER 2000 TO JUNE
2001
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could I ask you to give your full name, address, qualification and the
capacity in which you are appearing for the evidence, for the record?
DR PFITZNER:
My name is Dr Bernice Pfitzner, I live [address removed]. My capacity
was as a medical practitioner at the Woomera Detention Centre during the
time of October 2000 to the end of June 2001.
DR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you very much. Would you like to make an opening statement?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, Dr Ozdowski. I am very pleased to attend because I have long been
worried about the high stress levels of the parents and of the children
at the Woomera Detention Centre and I am very happy to give evidence so
that we can make a positive change to what is happening and has happened
at the Woomera Detention Centre.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much. As you possibly know we spoke to a number of doctors
before including some of the doctors who were in Woomera and we would
like to concentrate on some particular issues. First I would like to ask
you to address the issue of care provided for pregnant and nursing women
and also for babies and toddlers. Could I ask you a question, were there
special arrangements made for people in these groups, for example, were
the appropriate pre-natal and post-natal care, can you perhaps explain
to us how women, pregnant women and young children were looked after in
the complex of the detention centre?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, Dr Ozdowski. In my time there with regard to pregnant and nursing
women, they were given the similar care as were the women in South Australia,
namely that they had ante-natal checks which started as soon as we knew
that they were pregnant and on an ongoing sequential basis. The medical
doctor was to first check the pregnant women and then a specific nurse
was then to follow up on a weekly, fortnightly and monthly basis. After
that as the other women of South Australia were sent at 36 weeks to the
Port Augusta Hospital, the Woomera Hospital did not have the facilities
for delivering babies, so to my mind all the relevant investigations checks
and care were given to the pregnant women.
The only problem
with the situation was that there was such a turnover of nursing staff
it was as you were aware a six week turnover and not always during that
time did we get what I call an obstetric nurse to follow up and it was
disjointed because it wasn't the same nurse that was caring for the women
over the nine months of her pregnancy. So that was a bit of difficulty
but I was able to provide the continuity of this but it wasn't an optimum
situation and that brings me to the concern of the high turnover of medical
staff, in particular the nursing staff there at the detention centre.
DR OZDOWSKI:
From what you said it appears that women were spending a relatively longer
period of time in Port Augusta Hospital, usually as I understand a woman
would go a day or two days before birth and in the case of Woomera they
went substantial periods of time in advance to the hospital. Were they
told, were they explained the reasons for it?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes. I don't think they were sent for any greater length of time compared
to the other women in the South Australian community. It is the set procedure
in the country because there were not obstetricians available easily,
that they went to a specific hospital, in this case it was Port Augusta
Hospital, to be looked after and that was at 36 weeks until their delivery
which is, you know they stayed about four weeks, and this was normal procedure.
My understanding is that they were involved in being informed as to why
they were there for four weeks. The only difficulty was that the husband
may not have been able to go with mother because the husband had to stay
back and look after the other children that were left at the detention
centre and although we did advocate that the husband and the rest of the
family might go and stay at Port Augusta this was not able to be done
because of financial or logistic reasons.
DR OZDOWSKI:
And who informed them about going there, was it your responsibility or
was it somebody else who was informing them?
DR PFITZNER:
It was the nursing staff, well the medical officer decides that she was
36 weeks and it was time that the person went to in this case Port Augusta
Hospital and the obstetrician was informed and he was ready to have the
pregnant woman and she was happy to go. The only worry and sadness was
that she could not, that the rest of the family could not go with her
and visit her and see her over this period of four weeks.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Was she been able to be in regular telephone contact with the family in
detention centre?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, telephone contact was available.
DR OZDOWSKI:
How did you know about that?
DR PFITZNER:
I knew about it because I asked the staff with regard and I saw the husband
and the children on a regular basis so I'm quite certain that there was
contact.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now coming to the mother returning with her child, what supplies were
available, were the nappies, soap, cotton wool and so on available for
nursing mothers?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, there were formulas and nappies and all the various things that are
needed for the newborn. However, these provisions had to be ordered very,
very quickly and it was not always as smooth process of all those things
that were needed being available. For example, like I had to ring down
Adelaide at the pharmacy to order one dozen bottles for the milk and one
dozen teats.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So it was your responsibility to order formula milk for children or it
was sa failure of the system that you had to take that role?
DR PFITZNER:
I understand that the milk was available there, the only thing that I
was asked to order that they couldn't get were the bottles, the feeding
bottles.
DR OZDOWSKI:
The feeding bottles. Was the formula made available to them?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, the formula was available because there were other babies and children
that were there already and that's why they were there. There was never
any difficulty in getting the formula, the only I suppose criticism that
I would have was that there was no set procedure to make the order and
it was done in a very ad hoc manner.
DR OZDOWSKI:
We had evidence to the contrary in Adelaide that there were long delays
in accessing formula milk because it was relatively expensive. We had
evidence that some mothers had to feed children for a number of days with
hot water and sugar. What would be your commentary about this kind of
stories being told to us?
DR PFITZNER: Yes,
that may have been in the early days before I was there. I was there 2000,
maybe it was '99, but when I was there, there was never any inadequate
supply of formula. I saw the actual formulas there and the other problem
is a lot of staff were from Western Australia and Brisbane and Sydney
I think and so they used to order all those formulas and necessary equipment
from those places, whereas I was from South Australia, being a medical
practitioner I was able to ring directly to the pharmacy and the pharmacy
would bring it up within 24 hours, so while I was there, to my knowledge
there was not any inadequate feeding formula at all.
DR OZDOWSKI:
You mentioned earlier in your opening statement the issue of stress. Could
you perhaps describe a bit more, what did you mean by it, how children
could have been stressed in detention?
DR PFITZNER:
For my part I noticed the stress being with the parents greatly. I mean
the fathers and mothers that came. They were stressed because they were,
in effect, in limbo. When I arrived they were there, say 18 months and
some of them are still there and it is now three years and the reason
leading to the stress and anxiety and depression was because they did
not know the stage of the application of their protection visa, so they
almost came daily with this high stress and depression not knowing from
the Department of Immigration the status of their application and this,
of course, is high stress percolated down to the children, for example,
the mothers and fathers were very short tempered, they could not give
the adequate loving and cuddling and playing that a mother and father
would give in a more relaxed situation. They wouldn't be able to play
and verbalise because the parents themselves were very very highly stressed
and to my mind it was because they did not know whether they would stay
or leave.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could family function normally in such circumstances?
DR PFITZNER:
No, they couldn't, it's just like a huge bereavement or a huge death or
a huge catastrophe. Father and mother are not in raring mood, if you want
to put it that way, to bring up the children. When you rare children,
I am specialised in child development so I am very aware of children's
development and therefore there was no stimulation for the children in
speech or activity or play and it would be the same for any of us in the
community when we ourselves are highly stressed after huge calamity, and
this is a huge calamity, you just have to depend on your own resources
and the children are swept aside. Mother and father are impatient with
them and there is not any more loving or caring or warmth left to give
to the children because they themselves needed a lot of care.
DR OZDOWSKI:
You were in Woomera at the time of relative calm and relative in a way,
time when new people were still coming there. Did you observe any differences
in families and children and parents from the moment of arrival till,
say, a few months later and if so what were the changes?
DR PFITZNER:
I wouldn't put it as relatively calm, there is never relatively calm at
Woomera Detention Centre Dr Ozdowski. When I was there it was an in between
period, there were people who had been there for two years and there were
new ones still coming so I did have the opportunity to observe the different
groups and the stress level that they went through. So the people who
were there 18 months or so, they were highly stressed and therefore they
were self harming, like hanging and slashing and taking overdoses which
we had to monitor and help and send to hospital.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did it involve children as well and young people under 18?
DR PFITZNER:
No. That is why I am quite surprised that depression and stress must be
very, very deep now that the children are being involved as I hear from
the media reports. When I was there we worked very hard with the children
to give them play facilities and developmental activities and we worked
very hard with the parents to try to bolster their moods but it was very,
very hard because again, I stress, they did not know the status of their
visa application and therefore although facilities were available to the
children, play facilities, school facilities, the parents would not want
to take them.
They lack any energy,
they just stayed up very late at night as I understand, 3 or 4 o'clock
with the children and then they would sleep after that from exhaustion,
I understand and they would sleep till about 10 o'clock and we would have
activities starting at 9 and there was a dearth of children attending
these activities because of the high stress level and the non-compliance
of parents who themselves were stressed and were not in any mood to send
their children to school or to any play activity.
So, you asked me
about the progress of the stress level, yes, I saw it back to front, I
saw these one who were highly stressed, then I saw more people coming
in. The people when they come in were full of anticipation that Australia
being a very humanitarian, caring and I'm from Singapore myself, we always
have admired Australia for being such a caring nation around the South-East
Asian area.
We always said we
wish we could have that same attitude that Australia has but unfortunately
now, this has deteriorated and has gone down with regard to our status
of a caring nation.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So, you observed some change happening in people between arrival and
DR PFITZNER:
That's right, yes, I'm going off the point, aren't I? Yes, I saw when
they came in with the reputation of Australia having such a good human
rights track record, they were quite sure that they would be processed
quickly, that their application visa would be settled within six to 12
months at the most. When after three months I could see depression set
in and after six months I could see severe depression, anxiety, self-harm
and even some detainees having psychotic episodes and in lay terms, it
is going mad.
That was very stressful
to observe. We had to send a couple to Glenside to be looked after and
although I did not follow up with Glenside.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Glenside being?
DR PFITZNER:
Glenside being our mental hospital there in South Australia. They had
to be detained and assessed by a psychiatrist there and so with that kind
of mood happening to their parents I can imagine what the feeling of the
children can be. Certainly it would be very detrimental to their state.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What about ACM and DIMIA staff, how were those levels of stress impacting
on them?
DR PFITZNER:
ACM staff when I was there I saw four or five what they call, "CERT"
calls. This is emergency calls when there was a sudden uprising of a group
of detainees where they would maybe set something on fire, maybe start
slashing themselves, maybe start hanging themselves, maybe start throwing
stones at the guards, maybe start breaking windows those are the sort
of things we call a CERT for. When these were called we would be on high
alert and numerous detainees and ACM staff came in with cuts and bruises
and broken bones and slashes etcetera. It is very painful for even me
to recall and therefore it was very painful for ACM who had to go into
the compound and bring these injured people out for our medical attention.
I was aware that
two or three, one was an interpreter just went to pieces, a couple of
nurses just became hysterical, a couple of ACM guards had a fractured
ankle, not hysterical but very angry with the detainees all these people
I understand did have access to counselling but to my mind it would have
left an almost indelible impression.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So basically what you are saying is that mental health of everyone in
Woomera was in danger including DIMIA officers and ACM staff not just
talking about the detainees. So everyone was really having the impact
of the situation.
DR PFITZNER:
It was very stressful, yes and for ourselves being medically trained in
managing stress and I gather the nurses would be so we would know how
to manage and well I have seen such stress before but never in that kind
of situation but I would imagine that DIMIA officers well a lot of them
I had to be involved in counselling as well. The DIMIA officers maybe
were not prepared, maybe some were prepared more than others. I was not
involved in training them how to handle stress.
With regard to DIMIA
staff they were not very much hands on except for the director who came
in to help calm the situation but yes on the whole the situation would
be highly stressful and one would not leave without some stressful mark
being left on us all.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did you use any many medicines to manage the stress levels there?
DR PFITZNER:
Of which people?
DR OZDOWSKI:
Well anybody, but especially the detainees.
DR PFITZNER: Yes,
the detainees - as a medical officer I was contracted to look after the
detainees, as a side effect I would look after the actual staff, DIMIA
staff, ACM staff if it was an emergency then it would go to the Woomera
doctor who would carry on the follow up but my specific task was to look
after the detainees and I would say without over exaggerating that all
of the people there were highly stressed. They had come a long way from
the Middle East. They had travelled from the Middle East to, from Europe,
Middle East to Malaysia to Indonesia where they caught the boat. They
had to wait for a week or two before they caught the boat to this land
of milk and honey called Australia and
DR OZDOWSKI: But
were you prescribing any medicines to manage this stress?
DR PFITZNER: Yes,
I am just first identifying where the stress came from. So when they came
they were highly stressed from the travel of coming. Then their stress
dropped because they had hope in the first three or six months. After
that time all these stress levels became so high and it was evidenced
by all this physical self harm and yes, as we all know some human beings
handle stress very well and did not need medication but there were a lot
that did and when I say a lot I would say about 50 per cent needed some
kind of anti-depressive, anti-anxiety, even anti-psychotic that is the
kind of stress level, to alleviate their signs and symptoms. So, yes.
MS LESNIE:
Did that include children, people under 18?
DR PFITZNER: No,
no. For myself I try very hard not to include medication for children
but placed - and required the two or three psychologists that we had to
counsel them and try to de-stress them in what we call a verbal psycho-semantic
way rather than medication wise.
DR OZDOWSKI: You
mentioned various incidents like riots or burnings or hanging, two questions.
My first question is were children exposed to such riots and the second
question are you aware of the use of chemical restraints to manage behaviour
of individuals?
DR PFITZNER: Yes,
certainly the children have been affected by what they saw, the self harm
of their parents or their friends by the stoning or the rioting or the
complete undisciplined and non-controlled activities. The children would
have observed all this and of course children would be highly stressed
and there were psychologists that would be able to manage the children
and there was a colleague of mine who was specifically asked to come up
to handle the children but there was so much work to do and I do not believe
that they had adequate therapy there because the stress level was so high
and it even crossed over to the people who were supposed to provide the
healing activities.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Would it have a long term impact on children because we are really seeing
quite a substantial proportion of them to start in community?
DR PFITZNER:
I would have thought so being a child developmentalist of course never
experiencing these kinds of factors and pressures I would have thought
it would effect all children. But children are resilient and resistant
and I would hope that with therapy they would improve. I am now on the
Board of STARTTS which is Survivors of Torture and Trauma and I am there
requiring that we have, the children in there have a baseline of what
their stress level is and after three or six months assess the situation.
So for the moment I have noticed their stress level but I can't see what
the follow up is. I would think looking at our own children they all behave
differently. Children on the whole are very tough people, with the right
help and treatment they should come through right but there are some children
who just can't manage it and I don't know what percentage this would be
of the children that will finally become our Australian citizens.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Coming to the second question about use of chemical restraint. Are you
aware of use of chemical restraints regarding particular persons participating
in riots, or misbehaving?
DR PFITZNER:
No. If they were participating in riots the ACM officers would come and
quell them as they do in prisons and so on, calming things down. I myself,
and I during the nine months that I was there had to prescribe to two
or three people who were very, very highly stressed, wanting to self-harm,
and so I had to prescribe some calming medication in order that they also
be taken down to our Adelaide Psychiatric Hospital or Glenside. That was
the only time that I would have noticed what you call restraint, but the
restraint on a universal basis, no.
DR OZDOWSKI: Just
the last topic I would like to ask you about before I will ask my Assistant
Commissioner to ask you questions. Did you have children with physical
disabilities, or mental disabilities in Woomera?
DR PFITZNER: Yes,
we did, and I assessed quite a few of them. Yes, I'm aware of it. There
were some who, two or three who were completely deaf, weren't speaking.
One was 5 years old. Another was 2 years old. Another was 7. And they
were all referred appropriately to the Adelaide Children's Hospital, now
called the Women's and Children's Hospital, in Adelaide, and given the
appropriate treatment. There were a couple of children with very severe
birth defects, and sometimes we marvel at how they came across, or severe
birth defects, and they had what our children would have had. Sometimes
they had it even more rapidly because we pressured them very hard, because
the Woomera Detention Centre was not a place to have these children, with
severe birth defects.
DR OZDOWSKI: And
what period of time they were spending in Woomera?
DR PFITZNER:
Before they went to the hospital?
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes, well, I assume if they went to hospital they went for a treatment
and they came back to Woomera, or could you describe what was happening.
DR PFITZNER:
Well, the one that I recall with severe - some severe epilepsy and severe
mental disorder and severe physical disorder, was sent down, assessed,
and returned, and the child was finally sent down to Villawood, I think,
because Villawood is very close. It's here, yes, in Sydney, isn't it?
Villawood is very close to a big children's hospital. We felt that the
child had to be kept at the children hospital's in Adelaide somewhere,
or - but not in the Woomera Detention Centre.
DR OZDOWSKI:
And then, what, sent to Villawood Detention Centre?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, went to Villawood.
DR OZDOWSKI: What
were the times of children with disabilities in Woomera? How long were
they spending there?
DR PFITZNER:
What was the time-frame before they went down?
DR OZDOWSKI: No,
just, the longest time and the shortest time you would remember about
children with disabilities being in Woomera.
DR PFITZNER:
Well, when - I had a bit of a problem with regard to nurses referring
and so on to us as medical. I suppose in a way some of the nurses were
trying to protect us, and were not referring them to us, those who had
what I thought were severe medical conditions. So that is one difficulty
with regard to the nurses keeping from further - so this particular child
DR OZDOWSKI:
So nurses constitute a barrier of access to medical practitioners?
DR PFITZNER:
In one way if you want to be negative, we could put it as a barrier; on
the other way we could put it that we were almost over-worked and the
nurses were trying to filter the severe cases to us. So I would like to
put it in a positive manner, that this was done, but of course there were
errors made and sometimes delay. And this particular child that I'm thinking
of, there was some delay. I would have liked to see that particular child
when the child had arrived with obvious physical defect, mental and physical
defect. But I think I didn't see the child until the child had become,
fitting or severe breathing problems for about four to six weeks, and
I happened to see the child and the nurses treating it, and called the
child up and then identified the severe defect.
So in ideal circumstances
yes, that child should have been seen earlier than four to six weeks.
Once we observed the child, then it's not the problem. It just went very,
very quickly because we then pressured ACM or DIMIA to get the appropriate
guards, to get the appropriate appointment, to go down to, I don't remember
whether it's straight to the Children's or whether it was via Port Augusta,
and so
DR OZDOWSKI:
Are you saying when you are talking about "very quickly", are
you saying that the Department of Immigration was giving special priority
to children with disabilities in terms of processing of their cases?
DR PFITZNER:
I think it was up to the nurses and the medical officer if there was a
severe problem. I would myself go down and say, you know, "This person
needs to go". I'd speak to the DIMIA officer to get the release to
go to the hospital, because that was a financial commitment there. And
then go to ACM and say, "Let's get a car and guards and whatever
is needed to go down," and ring the hospital and make the appointments.
So all our medical role did not only refer to medical diagnosis. If we
wanted the thing to progress it was up to the doctor and the nurse, and
I took that task on, to actually go and push the thing through.
So it may be some
of the other doctors may have felt their task was just medical, and just
referred and hoped that it percolated through. In my experience if that
was done, and I don't know, the progress would be very slow. And I would
myself go and see the DIMIA staff, the DIMIA director, go and see the
ACM staff, the ACM manager, to get all those things together. It was a
very huge logistic operation, because you had to get permission, then
you have to ring the hospital to make sure that the child would be received,
and then the whole thing would progress.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Who was responsible for financing of such an operation?
DR PFITZNER:
I'm not sure because I don't know the DIMIA and ACM contract was, but
I am aware, just listening to perhaps some of the arguments, that there
was a gray area about who should finance what in the medical field. And,
you know, some of the things, they took a long time. But in the end, I
don't know about the financing but I just said, "The child has to
go, and you have to work it between yourselves." So there was a bit
of argument, and I did not stop to hear how they resolved it.
The biggest argument
with regard to medical access was in regard to preventative work, e.g.
immunisation, child development checks. Those were the things that I felt
that the children needed, that they didn't get, and I, being from child
developmental area, rang Child and Youth Health who I used to work for,
to ask nurses to come up. And there was a huge hiatus there because who
was to pay was the big issue because, as you're aware, the children are
not sick, but still they need the stimulation to grow up in a healthy
manner.
And in the end, as
I think I put in my submission, I had to just immunise the 200 of them
because it was such an argument as to whose responsibility of payment
it was, to do this kind of preventative work. So that's the area I would
be very critical about, an area with immediate treatment. It would be
done but it was up to the medical staff also to push it along.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Dr Pfitzner, thank you very much. I will ask now my Assistant Commissioners
to ask questions. Let's start with Mrs Sullivan.
MRS SULLIVAN:
You've mentioned treating stress. What would be the other three or four
top illnesses you would have treated in the centre.
DR PFITZNER:
Well, I suppose I would categorise it in two areas. One is with regard
to the mental health which areas would be high stress, anxiety, depression,
psychosis, we would have to handle that. The other area was physical.
Physical - in those areas we would have high blood pressure that we have
never seen in our life - 220, 250 over 150. I don't know whether you're
medical but that is huge. Our normal is 120/80, okay.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Right.
DR PFITZNER:
I've never seen over 200. You know, about to explode. So they carried
that. Whether that was a result of stress or whether it was a result of
organic origin I don't know but we had to treat them and we had to investigate.
There was severe diabetes, sugar-levels high, high - never seen before.
There were heart diseases, murmurs. Many things we have never seen because
we are such a developed country and these things are picked up when a
child is born or blood-pressure is monitored. There were the chronic illnesses,
asthma - severe asthma. Chronic illnesses.
Then there were the
infectious diseases. The hepatitis Bs and Cs. The infections of the skins,
scabies. You could see tracks of scabies under the skin, we had never
seen before. Huge tropical sores, we have never seen before. It was a
learning experience for all of us. I had to ring tropical medicines to
find out the treatment and so on. And those were the tropical diseases.
Intestinal parasites, we call them liver flukes and so on. Causing severe
abdominal pain and so on. So that was another area of infectious diseases.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And all of these were observable in the children and young people as well
as adults?
DR PFITZNER:
Scabies - the whole boatload had scabies.
MRS SULLIVAN:
I think you've possibly answered this question but in terms of the prevalence
of those diseases in the broader community, can you give an idea of whether
it was double, triple? I'm just trying to get a sense of your workload.
DR PFITZNER:
Compared to the Australian community?
MRS SULLIVAN:
Yes, mainstream Australian communities.
DR PFITZNER:
Oh, we cannot compare. Our Australian community is very, very healthy.
Australian community would not have any of these infectious diseases,
except if you were a traveller going to Kathmandu or something like that
you would come back with these kinds of diseases.
MRS SULLIVAN:
In terms of hepatitis were you vaccinating in that area as well as others?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, the workload was heavy. Very, very heavy. On 24 hours a day. We would
get three or four calls through the night with regard to self-harm in
the night.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So, would the normal GP be able to deal with these illnesses you've
just described or does it require some specialist knowledge?
DR PFITZNER:
The normal GP, which I am also, would initially find it very stressful
and very demanding. But it is not beyond the ability of that normal GP
to get up to speed to learn about it. We've never seen some of these diseases,
but if we are going to have migration of people from these areas we ought
to put ourselves up to speed to work on it.
I don't think any
specialist would be any better than a normal GP. Sometimes we would ring
the specialist and they would say, well we've never heard of this intestinal
infection, I'll look up my notes and come back to you. So in terms of
who should be employed I think the GP is the most appropriate but the
GP has to be the type that doesn't get stressed, and the type that is
willing to read up on tropical medicines and to learn very, very quickly
and hit the ground running.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Thank you. The next question is also a comparison question in a sense.
I'm trying to get a feel for the professional autonomy you would have
as a GP in a public hospital for example and the professional autonomy
you would have working in the detention centre. Could you make some comment
about that comparison?
DR PFITZNER: Yes,
with regard to working in the hospital you would be less stressed because
you have powers of your colleagues, peers and seniors to relate to, to
discuss, to give you a sense that you are doing things the right way.
When I was there I was the only medical officer except for a part-time.
We used to discuss but we had difficulty referring to our specialists.
Skin specialists, mental specialists and other infectious diseases specialists.
So, in that way we were more pressured with regard to letting us know
whether we were doing the right thing. We checked constantly but the people
were not on tap. With regard to autonomy, I'm not quite sure what you
are asking me.
MRS SULLIVAN:
My understanding of the management structure of health services is
that it is quite often a nurse who is the manager of the health services.
DR PFITZNER:
I see. Yes, we had a lot of trouble, we as medical officers had a lot
of trouble with regard to the structure that was there. This is not a
criticism, it's something that I hope will improve so I will speak in
that vein. The co-ordinator was invariably a nurse. The nurse was there
- I myself felt that the co-ordinator should be a medical officer because
things were very, very complex there. High on the list were diseases that
you never come across, that you couldn't explain adequately because you
were hitting the ground running all the time.
So, if it was a nurse
it needed to be a very special nurse who had qualifications in obstetrics,
in infectious disease, in mental disease, in chronic health. Apart from
also knowing the financial set-up and the referral criteria. So, whoever
the co-ordinator, it was a very difficult job. And if the co-ordinator
was compliant and worked well with the medical officer that was not a
problem. If the nurse did not have a problem with regard to hierarchy
structure that was not a problem. If we could have worked as a team with
nurses - co-ordinator nurses and medical officers that was not a problem.
But I am aware, and
know, that the turnover is every six weeks. And that was dreadful. We
would have a team - the co-ordinator would be permanent - but then the
teamwork of all the hard work would be gone. All the keeping of simple
things like medication, intravenous, things we need in a hurry, the new
nurses wouldn't know where it was. So, you were there stemming the bleeding
and you ask, get intravenous therapy, they wouldn't know where it was.
So, I had to ask someone to hold the bleeding. You knew where it was because
you were long-term there, you'd have to get it and so on.
It was not the best
situation for the stressful, almost war zone, to have. In that kind of
environment you need a 12-month contract and a teamwork, and a team to
know exactly what you mean when you say, get the connector to the intravenous,
and they know where to go.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Perhaps I could put an example to you? For example, if your were to refer
somebody for treatment to a psychiatric hospital, which could be quite
expensive, would you have the situation where the nurse - or somebody
else in the hierarchy - would second-guess your diagnosis, or would act
slowly on your diagnosis?
DR PFITZNER:
Well, it may have happened to the other doctors but being the person that
I am, I was insistent that I thought was right, because in the end I know
that I would carry the can if something happened. So yes, it happened,
we argued about whether it was necessary, money-wise, finance-wise, medical-wise.
But in the end I would say, if you want it that way you sign the form
to say that this person is not right, and you take it, and many times
they - always in their review they would back, back down. But the thing
is, why did I need to do it is the question which you would appreciate.
MRS SULLIVAN:
My final question goes back to your comments about the resilience
of children. I am assuming that you were concerned about developmental
delay from some of your opening comments. Were there developmental delays
occurring in children as a result of living in the detention centre that
in fact are irreversible?
DR PFITZNER:
As the result of staying in the detention centre?
MRS SULLIVAN:
Yes, of the environmental factors that are there, or the social factors,
or even the physical factors?
DR PFITZNER:
I can say that there were children who came in with severe developmental
problems, but that had occurred at birth or coming through, but with regard
to children who were there and the environment impacting on that child,
no, in the time that I was there. After seeing that, you know, I just
eyeballed them, I didn't assess them, and to actually answer your question
positively and certainly we would need to do a long-term follow-up.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Is that some of the work you're doing on your new board, you are following
through with some of those children?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, it's started, survivors of torture and trauma, yes.
MRS SULLIVAN:
But your judgement is that sufficient time has not elapsed yet to
make that judgment?
DR PFITZNER:
No, well they are being assessed now. I would like them to be assessed
as soon as they are discharged, and having a three month ongoing - whether
this is done, I don't know, because of financial constraints and so on,
but ideally that would be good and we could learn how we might manage
the children better if there were some permanent damage rather than temporary
damage. In my mind at this present time I believe it is temporary, but
I could be very wrong.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So no trends have emerged to this point in time in your data?
DR PFITZNER:
No.
PROF THOMAS:
Probably one way to eliminate the effect of pre-migration factors would
be to observe the children who are born there, so during your time how
do you observe those who are born there in the first 12 months of life?
DR PFITZNER:
Yes, I was there nine months, and the children that were born there would
probably be in the middle of my nine months, so I would have said I did
not have enough time to observe, but indeed the children were feeding
well, which is one of the signs, the children were ..... development was
okay, they were holding their heads up and following. In terms of visual
development they were tracking and following. So just informally I was
not aware, and I saw the children when they came out and picked their
food and drank their milk and so on, I was not aware that there was any
developmental delay of the children that were born there, but look, I
was only there nine months. They were born in the middle so I only had
a six months' look at them.
PROF THOMAS:
It's a pity, because now there are some children there who are sort of
one year old, and it would be good if we could have some objective assessment.
DR PFITZNER:
Well, in my time I did ask for a team of child developmentalists in the
beginning of my nine months, who as you say have a base line knowledge
of their development and later when they went out to have a follow-up
of these. But because of financial constraints, because of the constraints
of whether it was State of Federal payment, this did not happen in my
time and I was very, very upset with that, to tell you the truth, because
I am very, very aware of child development and wanted to show how we might
best handle the children better if we had data from the very start. I
am sorry I was not able to get a team up there.
PROF THOMAS:
How about the older children? Do you see any age inappropriate behaviour?
DR PFITZNER: With
regard to the older children, when I was there, I suppose they were not
that long there. They were there maybe nine months, and they related well,
played well and so on, spoke well, but towards the end of my nine months
there were beginning to be some children who were getting very - who would
not eat, who would sit alone on their own, because their parents were
very, very highly stressed. Those are the children I did worry about,
I don't know how they progressed, don't know.
PROF THOMAS: I
am interested in the relationship between the guards or the ACM officers
and the children. We tend to hear of the extreme cases, but to your observation
how do you find them in general?
DR PFITZNER:
In general, as we went along the guards were better and better trained.
Initially as I understand it the guards were very criminal based, very
hard edged, and I think - I had a great problem with that. They were detainees,
you know, they were asylum seekers. So I was involved in training some
of the newer guards to say this is not the way, they're not criminals,
this is not the way to treat - if you are not treating them on a humanitarian
ground then think that if you treat them such-and-such a way that you
will get a better response. As we went along during my nine months time
there, there was a great improvement in the handling of the asylum seekers
of detainees. On the whole you are asking me were they treated well, with
respect? I think it depended on the individual, but on the whole it was
not optimum. Some treated them wonderfully, understood that they were
human beings just like the rest of the community, and just treated them
as friends and so on. On the other end of the wedge, they were ordered
around, told to not give opinions, pushed back and those sorts of things
make you lose your dignity and self-esteem. But there was a middle ground
of people who were, you know, it was not optimum. Nobody had come across
such a situation before, and certainly none of the ACM officers knew how
to handle them at first. When I left, they were improving but again, they
had to move after six weeks, and new people coming in, and had the whole
situation again. It was hard, very hard.
PROF THOMAS:
So it's back to accountability, how the complaint process, do the detainees
complain if there is something that they think should not be done?
DR PFITZNER: I
understand that there was, that they report it to an officer, the officer
takes it through, and there was a specific officer dedicated for the complaints,
but my hands were full with regard to looking after the mental and physical,
so I did not. Sure, that area needed to follow-up but I cannot comment
on that area with any great reliability.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Dr Pfitzner, thank you very much for your evidence. Would you like to
make a final comment, a final statement?
DR PFITZNER: Yes
I would, Dr Ozdowski. I hope that this human rights Inquiry would not
be a witch hunt for anything that has happened, or has passed, because
there were a lot of people like ourselves who were concerned about what
was happening. We had never come across such a situation as this before
in our life. I imagine it would be like, you know, a war zone in Vietnam
or wherever, I don't know, but we were all trying to work our best, and
there were people who were not equipped with the ability to handle it,
and there was this huge turnover every six weeks which made the situation
worse. So I feel, and it's in my submission, that coming out from this
Inquiry, that we should certainly identify the negatives, but put in place
the positives, how we might do it better everywhere in the world. We're
not doing it well and I think if Australia can come back to our human
rights and our place in South East Asia, which has a high standing on
human rights, and give a positive response how we might change the situation,
it would be very beneficial.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you, Dr Pfitzner.
Now, could I ask
representatives of the Muslim Women Network of Australia to approach.
Thank you for coming. Could I ask you to start with taking an oath or
an affirmation?
MS JAMILA HUSSAIN,
affirmed [10.32am]
MRS FAIKAH BEHARDIEN, affirmed
AUSTRALIAN MUSLIM WOMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Now I would like
to ask you to state your names, addresses and the capacity in which you
are appearing for the purpose of the record.
MS HUSSAIN: My
name is Jamila Hussain, that's J-a-m-i-l-a H-u-s-s-a-i-n. I live at [address
removed] and I am the - I am appearing as a member of the Muslim Women's
National Network of Australia. I am the person who wrote the submission
that is before you and I would intend, if it pleases you, to make an opening
statement and simply mention a couple of things and leave it to my friend,
Faikah, to do the bulk of the evidence.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could we ask the second person to do the introduction for the record and
then we will go to the opening statement.
MRS BEHARDIEN:
My name is Faikah Behardien, I live at [address removed] and I am
here as a volunteer of the Muslim Women's National Network. I am also
the Vice-President of the organisation.
DR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you very much. Ms Hussain, please go with your opening statement.
MS HUSSAIN:
I just wanted to say a few words about the organisation that I represent.
The Muslim Women's National Network of Australia is a multi-cultural Muslim
women's organisation. It has the aim of helping Muslim women in the community
to integrate into the mainstream community. It also offers them help in
physical and educational matters, for example we have run Arabic classes,
we have run English classes for non-English speaking women. We have been
very involved in interfaith work and in giving talks and seminars and
information to churches and community organisations about the Muslim community
and we also liaise with interstate Muslim women's groups. We are not a
very large organisation and all our work is voluntary.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could you mention your experience with people who are either in detention
or who came out of detention and in particular, children?
MS HUSSAIN:
Yes. I have not been a frequent visitor to Villawood. Some of our ladies
started visiting Villawood Immigration Detention Centre in Ramadan last
year, that was December, and gradually we became aware that they were
very unhappy with the conditions of some of the children there. Some of
the ladies began to visit offering material aid such as clothes. At Eid-ul-Fitr
we took food and tried to arrange a celebration for them and we also became
very concerned about the education or rather the lack of education that
was being offered to the children, in particular the children over the
age of 12, ones between 12 and 18.
I took it upon myself
to make inquiries to try to establish the position in other detention
centres and I liaised with people interstate and also spoke to detainees
about the educational situation. I think at that stage at the time the
submission was written, the situation was that the younger children at
Villawood were getting some education but there was some disagreement
about how much. Some of them said a few hours a week, four or five hours
a week. Some said only about two hours a week.
The older children
were getting nothing. I was personally very concerned about this because
some of those children had been there for over two years and that is a
huge gap in their life for them to make up when and if they are ever released.
I was also involved with Sister Faikah in arranging a meeting with the
minister's advisory committee at Villawood, particularly a Dr Al Salami
and Major General Glenny and there were three things that we made representations
about there.
One was the education
of the children and we asked in particular that the children be allowed
to leave Villawood to attend local schools as we'd been informed was happening
at Curtin and possibly one or two other detention centres. We also made
a representation about religious matters and the situation there was that
at that time there was no provision at all for Muslim religious instruction
or for Islamic religious services.
At some time in the
past before we became involved, the detainees had had the use of a building
as a mosque. As I am sure you would be aware some of them managed to tunnel
under that building and escaped from the detention centre. As a result,
that building was taken away and there were no provisions at all in place
for any religious instruction or counselling. We asked that a Shia Imam
be allowed to visit the centre on a regular basis on Fridays to lead the
jum'a prayers.
I do not know what
happened as a result of our representations but at the moment, I understand
the Supreme Islamic Council which is one of the peak Islamic bodies in
the State has arranged for an Imam to be allowed to go to Villawood on
Fridays to conduct the jum'a prayer. As far as I know there are no arrangements
at all for religious instruction for the children or for anyone else there.
The third issue that
we talked about was women's health needs. Particularly that the women
be allowed to consult female doctors because as you know some or most
of these women come from cultures where women are kept very much secluded
and would be far too embarrassed to consult a male doctor particularly
about any kind of personal matter. I am not sure whether what has happened
in relation to that, perhaps Faikah would be able to say more.
The other thing that
I thought perhaps to make some comment on is the question relating to
Muslims in detention and the misunderstandings in the general community.
I'm in my other life I am a lecturer in law and my particular field of
interest is Islamic Law and South East Asian Law. I found through my discussions
with other people in the community and all sorts of ways that there is
a huge amount of ignorance about Islam amongst the majority of Australians,
even well educated Australians and unfortunately people seem to get their
knowledge of Islam and of Muslims and of Muslim culture from the media
and particularly the horror stories and the sensational stories that get
the most prominence in the media.
So I think there
always has been a generally negative impression of Islam and Muslims in
Australia. Since the Tampa crisis and since 11 September last year I have
noticed that there have been two separate reactions amongst the general
community. One has been a great increase in interest and our president
Sister Aziza and myself have been almost run off our feet sometimes by
going from place to place by invitation and giving talks to church groups,
community groups, in my case members of the judicial commission and all
sorts of other people about the Muslim community in Australia so there
has been a heightened interest and hopefully an increase in understanding
on one side.
On the other side
there seems to have been a rise in prejudice. Now I don't look like a
Muslim so I don't experience a great deal of that myself but from what
other people have told me there have been increased incidents of racism
if you like against other people. I've only noticed this myself in that
I have written a couple of letters to my local newspaper and in return
I have received quite a lot of anonymous racist mail
DR OZDOWSKI: But
could I ask you to focus on children in detention, it is what this Inquiry
MS HUSSAIN:
Okay, my letters to the local press were about children in detention.
I didn't mention Muslims, just children in detention of whatever nationality
but I noticed that some of the anonymous mail I had got back was about
Muslims. Obviously there is a transfer from anyone in detention must be
a Muslim and therefore we hate them. I find that a matter of great concern.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Are you aware of this prejudice happening in the detention centres?
MS HUSSAIN:
I have been, I have heard there is some but I wouldn't like to comment
any further because I haven't seen it or heard it myself.
DR OZDOWSKI: The
lack of religious education in detention centres, how does it impact on
children?
MS HUSSAIN:
Well children would grow up without a proper understanding, without any
understanding perhaps of their religion and religion is part of life,
part of culture and I would think on a long term basis it would have a
rather negative effect. It would also I think divide them from their parents
because their parents would presumably have been people who would have
had religious instruction at least in their youth, would have grown up
and lived in a society which supported their religion and their children
are growing up in a society without religious education and when they
leave, if they leave in a society which doesn't support their religion.
So there is an alienation that takes place there.
DR OZDOWSKI: Does
your organisation or is your organisation in contact with children who
have left detention centres?
MS HUSSAIN:
I think two who are very small and we couldn't really make any comment
about them and some much older boys, possibly young men but I couldn't
say any more than that.
DR OZDOWSKI: I
will ask my Assistant Commissioners whether they have got any questions,
Mrs Hussain.
PROF THOMAS:
Are you aware of any information, anything at all about Muslim girls in
these detention centres?
MS HUSSAIN:
Well I have met Muslim girls there.
MS LESNIE: So
what are some of the difficulties facing the girls that you met there?
MS HUSSAIN: Well
the girl that I had most to do with was most concerned about the lack
of education. She wanted to go on to university. Now that particular girl
has been sent back. I really haven't had any other conversations with
children.
MRS BEHARDIEN:
If I could just add to that, the kinds of concerns that Muslim children
have are exactly the same as any child would have and the fact that they
are not getting an education is in itself of concern to all of us. So
there isn't any specific discrimination if you wish against Muslim children
although if you look at the stats most of the children in detention are
Muslim but the fact that they are not getting a good education that they
are in a context that is totally abnormal for them is in itself a huge
concern for the whole community.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes we have had quite a lot of evidence from teachers and so on, on this
subject. Mrs Sullivan?
MRS SULLIVAN:
We did see some evidence during our visits to the centres of Christian
ministers of religion having access to detainees. Were you saying in your
opening comment that access is not available or just that there haven't
been appropriate people to take that function.
MRS BEHARDIEN:
My understanding is that one of the leading Imam's not only in Sydney
but in Australia was banned if you wish from coming to Villawood detention
centre two years ago and so there isn't any structured religious instruction
being given by anybody at the moment.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Is that only Villawood or do you have a knowledge of the other centres?
MRS BEHARDIEN:
I correspond with a minor, an unaccompanied minor in Port Hedland and
what he tells me is that the people within the detention centre look after
each other. So those with a little bit of religious knowledge would share
it with the kids and with the other adults.
MRS SULLIVAN:
This is because of the lack of an appropriate person to come in.
MS HUSSAIN:
I could say also that I visited a couple of the young men and they asked
for religious material to be brought in - we did that.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And my second question relates to people who have been released into the
community under whatever circumstances. It would seem to be natural for
those people to gravitate to the appropriate cultural groups that they
identify with. What is your judgment about the amount of support they
are to get from such groups.
MRS BEHARDIEN:
Fairly little, fairly ad hoc unfortunately and it is really not structured
and it is really left up to the goodwill of the organisations concerned
and the people concerned to provide it. So unfortunately there is no formalised
structure to enable them to access religious instruction or religious
support or counselling or anything related to it but the community is
fairly good. So not to denigrate the community they are fairly good about
that.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Do they give priority to the unaccompanied minors or is it just a
more general support?
MRS BEHARDIEN:
I'm not quite sure if you'd call it, you know, like favoured support.
That a bunch of - a group of boys from Bamiya, Hazzara boys, are being
looked after both in the community, in families as well as in institutionalised
areas or buildings if you wish and organisations.
MRS SULLIVAN:
We have had some comments made that unaccompanied male minors - particularly
those round about 15 to 18 - have been disaffected about education and
training within the centre, and when they move into the community are
similarly not attracted to education and training opportunities. They
are at a bit of a loose end, they are searching around for some meaning.
Is that your experience?
MRS BEHARDIEN:
I've worked with them - not worked. I meet with a couple of families on
a regular basis. One family has a 21 year old son who decided that he
wanted to improve his English and went back to high school to do his HSC
and he is back at high school. The younger brother and younger sister
are still in high school. So they value education, and that is one family.
The others are younger kids. They're at primary school, and they have
gone back to school. They happily adapt.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So, just to clarify, you don't have any experience of this type of young
male with a
MRS BEHARDIEN:
Not the unaccompanied ones, no. My experience has been with males as part
of a family group, yes.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So is there an identified community group that might focus on young people
specifically?
MRS BEHARDIEN:
You mean within this community?
MRS SULLIVAN:
Well, it may not be your organisation, but are you able to identify a
community group that such young people could make contact with?
MRS BEHARDIEN:
Not really, no.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Thank you.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much, to your organisation and to you for coming and making
a statement, Mrs Behardien.
Now, we will have
a break. We will meet again at 10 past 11.
SHORT BREAK [10.53am]
RESUMES [11.10am]
DR OZDOWSKI: Now,
I would like to invite the Lebanese Muslim Association to come forward
to give evidence.
KEYSAR TRAD, affirmed
[11.11am]
LEBANESE MUSLIMS ASSOCIATION
DR OZDOWSKI: Now,
can I ask you to give your name, address, qualification, and capacity
in which you are appearing, for the record.
MR TRAD: My
name is Keysar Trad. I am presently the spokesperson for the Lebanese
Muslims Association. The information in my submission was based on experiences
that I had when I was either Secretary or Vice-President of the Lebanese
Muslims Association.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you, Mr Trad. Before moving to hearing your evidence, I would like
to thank you for your submission. I would also like to remind you of the
orders we put in place, that you do not identify asylum seekers or you
do not identify third parties in your evidence. If you would like to put
some individual cases to us in evidence, please talk later to the Secretary
to the Inquiry. Now, could I ask you to perhaps deliver an opening statement,
and in particular if I could ask you to talk about your experience with
children in detention centres, or children who have been released from
detention centres.
MR TRAD: Firstly
I'd like to thank you for accepting my submission, and for giving me the
opportunity to speak with you today. I've been asked to only address one
particular issue from my submission, although I raised a number of issues,
and the issue that I've been asked to address is the issue of maintaining
religious and cultural identity. So I've focused my opening words on the
issue of religious and cultural identity.
From a general perspective
cultural identity and heritage are crucial for many reasons, and members
of our community, members of the Muslim community are particularly keen
to learn about their traditions and cultural and religious heritage and
to pass this knowledge on to their children. The significance of learning
one's culture is acknowledged by article 8 of the United Nations Convention
on the Rights of the Child. Under this article Australia must ensure that
every child in Australia regardless of nationality or immigration status
and regardless of how the child arrived in Australia, enjoys access to
their culture and identity without discrimination of any kind.
Under this convention
Australia is obliged to ensure the right of children belonging to ethnic,
religious or linguistic minorities to enjoy their culture, use their language
and practice their religion together with other members of their group.
The convention also recognises the right of parents to provide appropriate
direction and guidance to their children in maintaining their own religion
and culture. People who are detained in a foreign country like the asylum
seekers who come to Australia are generally limited in their level of
access to authentic literature and other references about their culture
and also in their ability to receive culturally sensitive services including
religious services.
As a religious and
welfare organisation the Lebanese Muslims Association received regular
calls in the year 2000 from Muslim asylum seekers requesting visits by
appropriately qualified religious clerics. The visits that we could organise
could only be narrow visits in that not all Muslims in the detention centre
could be brought together but only those named on the visitor application
form. We were quite often asked by asylum seekers to make such visits
and the issue was regularly raised that Christian clerics or counsellors
or Christian counsellors were able to make visits and proselytise to the
asylum seekers.
There were also comments
that the Christian visits are impacting on some of the asylum seekers,
some of the Muslim asylum seekers, in that they are made to feel that
the Christian proselytisers, cared more about the Muslim leaders. Because
the Christian proselytisers were making visits in a formal capacity whereas
Muslim leaders could only make visits to individuals. This aspect has
a greater psychological impact on children as they regularly raise the
question, where is the Imam. Unbeknown to them the Imam was denied access
or similar access to the Christian religious leaders.
In recognition of
this problem his Eminence the Mufti of Australia as a spiritual leader
of Australia's Muslim community took it upon himself to offer his religious
services to the asylum seekers through seeking official permission from
the Minister. The aim and content of these services included to administer
religious and cultural services. To provide religious and cultural instructions.
To provide counselling and solace. To maintain cultural links especially
in the case of children. The Minister for Immigration refused to permit
the Mufti to perform these duties on the ground that this may be seen
as proselytising. The same concern of proselytising did not appear to
stop the Minister from affording the opportunity to Christian groups to
proselytise amongst Muslim asylum seekers. A fact that has been reported
in an ABC Radio interview that was referred to in my submission. Also
in the Christian Southern Cross newspaper also referred to in my submission.
I recall on one of
my visits to Villawood, in or about November 1999, that detained asylum-seekers
complained that other asylum-seekers who had expressed an interest in
Christianity were better looked after and better treated. And rumours
were afloat amongst the asylum-seekers that these people would get a speedy
protection visa.
Now, in support of
some of the statements I have a signed statement by his Eminence the Mufti
explaining his conversation with the Minister in June of 2000 where I
was present. He asked the Minister through myself acting in my capacity
as somebody who speaks both Arabic and English and I was translating for
him. The Mufti confirms what he asked the Minister and what the Minister
replied to him, and the subsequent letter that was sent to the Villawood
Detention Centre requesting an official visit where we would address both
Muslim and Christian detainees.
Now despite being
the spiritual leader of all the Muslims in Australia, a fact that has
been confirmed by the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils on several
occasions - including their recent Congress - the Minister turned around
and said, I don't believe that you represent all the Muslims in Australia.
So, if I allow you to go inside and preach - knowing that you will only
be addressing Muslim asylum-seekers - then you may be proselytising some
to your particular brand of Islam. This was really a shocking statement
to us at that time. That people in the detention centre are free to attend
and listen to the Mufti or not listen to the Mufti or to the representative
of the Mufti. It just seemed to us at the time that there was no respect
shown to the religious leader or to the rights of the asylum-seekers to
receive services and instructions in their religion and culture.
DR OZDOWSKI: Yes,
we will take this document into evidence. Now coming back to your statement,
your experience is limited to Villawood only or you visited some other
detention centres as well?
MR TRAD: I've
only physically visited Villawood but I've had phone contact with asylum-seekers
in Curtain and in Port Hedland and in Woomera. I've visited asylum-seekers,
including children who have been released from Woomera and also from Curtain.
DR OZDOWSKI:
We visited Port Hedland not that long ago and we spoke about the issue
with detainees over there and we saw that there are two separate buildings
used for praying purposes - as mosques. But the detainees over there told
us that it is impossible to attract an Imam to come for a visit. It is
not an issue of access over there, but rather an issue of finding an Imam
who would be available to go there.
MR TRAD: During
our visit with the Minister whose evidence - the Mufti made an offer to
the Minister to go and visit all the detention centres around Australia.
And he was offering that either himself or an Imam that he would choose
would go and spend at least a week at each of these detention centres
from time-to-time. Up to a week, depending on how much the Minister would
permit. And the same answer was given by the Minister. That basically
this would be seen as proselytising.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now you, I assume, requested a number of times access by Imams to different
detention centres?
MR TRAD: There
was the request to the Minister that I mentioned, at his office, and a
subsequent request in writing and follow-up phone calls.
DR OZDOWSKI: It
was only a single request - a request around a single occasion - or numerous
requests?
MR TRAD: It
was only those requests that I mentioned. There was one other instance,
where the National Operations Manager of ACM contacted me personally,
when 600 asylum-seeks in Curtain were on a hunger strike and many had
stitched their lips. We were in consultation with each other as to the
best way of addressing this problem. I suggested a delegation of several
Muslim religious leaders from different denominations to attend and to
provide counselling to the hunger strikers to break the hunger strike.
On that occasion
it was surprising that the ACM Operations Manager was very open to the
suggestion and he was making every step to get official approval. At the
end of the day he said to me that we can only give approval to one person,
not to the others, and the Minister could not be contacted to give that
approval anyway. He is somewhere on the - I think he said on the Gold
Coast at that time. By that stage it was about 9.00 pm at night and the
asylum-seekers did not receive the appropriate counselling on that occasion.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I am in a way surprised that the matter went to the Minister, because
ACM appears to have the operational management of detention facilities.
So at least as far as I understand the system the ACM Manager should be
able to make that decision. But I see it is not your experience, is it?
MR TRAD: I'm
surprised also. We were under the understanding that the ACM Manager makes
that decision and this was why the letter that we sent to Villawood was
addressed to the ACM Manager. However, we were surprised to hear that
he had to refer it to Canberra. I don't know if there is a specific instruction
from the Minister instructing the ACM Manager that requests from Muslim
clerics has to be referred in that manner.
I have to add that
the Mufti can go inside and visit asylum-seekers but on an individual
basis, not as a group of Muslims. And this is a concern. That ACM had
to basically go outside their operational procedures - their normal operational
procedures - to put the request to the Minister and wait for the Minister's
office to give a decision on the matter.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Does he go in and visit on a one-to-one basis?
MR TRAD: He
used to, early in 2000. After that request was made he has not made an
official - he has not made the visit on an individual basis but he has
been taking phone calls from asylum-seekers. I have made visits after
that request was denied, but in a non-official capacity, and on an individual
basis.
DR OZDOWSKI: How
are the religious needs of children catered for in detention centres at
present?
MR TRAD: My
understanding at the moment is that the religious needs are only catered
for by what the parents can provide. We were quite fortunate in - about
a year ago in Villawood that some of the detained asylum-seekers had a
reasonable level of religious knowledge. Some of them had undertaken religious
courses overseas so they were offering some services. But these people
are fellow detainees who are traumatised by the experience of detention
themselves and they were also asking for outsiders to come in there and
administer these religious services. To an extent they are able to provide
some of the need - to meet some of the need, but not to the appropriate
standards. Or not to the standards that are required or requested.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What about access to religious literature? Would people have free access
to the Koran or to other religious literature in a detention situation?
MR TRAD: There
has been no complaint about access to religious literature. And on the
occasions if we were asked - I have not received the request for religious
literature myself - but if we were asked I believe that we could have
provided them, but we have not tried.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What would be the consequences for children of lack of access to religious
education in detention?
MR TRAD: Religious
education, particularly Islamic religious education, has a very strong
emphasis on ethical and moral values, and also on the solace and the values
of patience and perseverance. And being in a traumatised situation like
the detention centres where you need constant counselling and constant
offers of support, compassion and so forth, it just adds to the trauma
if you don't have these services.
With the children
not receiving appropriate and adequate instruction, only having access
to instruction from their parents who are too concerned about their own
plight means that those children are missing at a crucial time in their
life some very important aspects or teachings that are crucial to their
development as human beings at a time that they are so impressionable
that will impact on their life as adults and it is really at this time
that they need as much support as possible from community leaders and
from people who are appropriately qualified in matters of religion and
culture and history.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did you meet some more children and young people after they were released
from detention centres?
MR TRAD: I
have met some of them, not a large number but I have met some, in one
case it was a little girl aged 2, in another case there were several children
aged between 5 and 10.
DR OZDOWSKI:
And did you observe any impact on them of the lack of religious education
in the context of detention centres?
MR TRAD: I
did observe some impact on these children but in the particular case of
the children that I visited that actually had suffered other problems
in detention centres. One of those children who is also in my submission
was the victim of a gang rape by other detainees in Curtin Detention Centre.
So they are already quite traumatised when I visited them and the children
were basically behaving in a way that showed that they do not really have
an understanding of their culture or background or anything like that,
they were just behaving differently.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Mrs Sullivan?
MRS SULLIVAN:
Are there any special provisions made for unaccompanied minors that you're
aware of in terms of cultural maintenance and religious education?
MR TRAD: I
am not aware of any special provisions for unaccompanied minors in terms
of religious education or cultural education.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So when you said it becomes the parents' responsibility these people have
no parents so do the other adults in the centre take any responsibility?
MR TRAD: I
could only make an assumption that some of the other adults would take
on that responsibility and perhaps some of the other adults may even seek
to prey on these children.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And in terms of when the unaccompanied minors are released to the
community I actually asked this question of an earlier group, is there
any focus by your community on the unaccompanied minors who have been
released?
MR TRAD: If
we're advised of an unaccompanied minor who is released then we as a community
have already worked out a program as part of community services a foster
parenting program where we would try and place the unaccompanied minor
with foster parents from their own background but I have not received
a case of that nature in my organisation to date.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So you would need contact from DOCS in order to do that?
MR TRAD: We
would need contact from DOCS or the department. One of the problems that
we have is that when the Department releases someone if the family needs
any community support they will not release them to an organisation that
receives any form of DIMIA funding. Our organisation has a community settlement
officer who is funded by the Department of Immigration so they would not
use us as a point of contact for these matters but previously they were
using an organisation by the name of Supreme Islamic Council of New South
Wales because they are not funded but interestingly the Supreme Islamic
Council came to us to seek financial support to provide for families in
that situation.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So there's a willingness but nothing has actually happened?
MR TRAD: No.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Have these children gone to other foster families to your knowledge?
MR TRAD: The
only case that I know of is that particular family where the organisation
that was enlisted for support came to us for financial assistance and
they are managing that particular case. We are not permitted to manage
it as an organisation through the normal channels, we would have to do
it as executives working on it and this is how I take on these cases as
an executive officer in the organisation but I cannot allocate any of
this work to my staff because one of the staff is funded as a community
settlement officer.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Pardon my ignorance because I don't come from New South Wales but is there
an Islamic schooling process in New South Wales?
MR TRAD: There
are several private schools that also teach, that are run by a Muslim
board and they do impart instruction in the Islamic religion. However,
not all Muslim children go to these schools, many of them including my
own children go to public schools and there are after hours schools that
they can be taken to weekend schools where they can receive special instruction.
They also have full and free access to lectures at the Mosque where they
can be taken to receive religious instructions.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And to your knowledge do any unaccompanied minors go to either the weekend
schools or any of the other opportunities that you are aware of?
MR TRAD: I
don't have any knowledge on that matter.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So how would they get the knowledge that those opportunities are available?
MR TRAD: From
my understanding they would get this knowledge if they are placed with
parents who are from their own background who would understand the importance
of continuing their education or of introducing them to education about
culture, identity and religion.
MRS SULLIVAN:
That's not provided at an exit interview by DIMIA for example?
MR TRAD: Not
to my knowledge.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Professor Thomas?
PROF THOMAS:
To your knowledge do most of the children placed with foster families,
are most of them placed with foster families of Muslim background?
MR TRAD: In
New South Wales, and this is outside the detention centre issue, there
is every effort to place them with foster families form their own background
and the programs are in place to seek Muslim foster parents for Muslim
children. As far as detention centres are concerned I have absolutely
no information as to what happened to the unaccompanied minors who were
given visas.
PROF THOMAS: Thank
you.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Do you have any concluding statement you would like to make?
MR TRAD: I
don't except thank you very much for this opportunity and I hope it all
goes well especially for those unfortunate people in detention centres
and for the children and the minors, thank you very much.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much Mr Trad.
Now, could we ask
Mr Harold Bilboe to come forward. Thank you, Mr Bilboe. I would like to
ask you to take an oath or affirmation.
ARTHUR BILBOE, affirmed [11.33am]
PSYCHOLOGIST PREVIOUSLY WITH ACM AT WOOMERA
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you. Now, could I ask you to give your name, address, qualification
and capacity in which you are appearing for the record.
MR BILBOE:
My name is Harold Arthur Bilboe. I am a psychologist. My address is [address
removed]. I appear here as a psychologist who used to work with ACM at
Woomera in Curtin for approximately 16 months of long term continual contractual
employment from September of 2000 through to January of 2002.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much. Perhaps before we move to hear your evidence, I would
like to remind you that I am asking that you won't identify asylum seekers
and also that you won't identify any the third parties. If you would like
to put individual cases to our attention please talk, after the hearing,
to the Secretary or please put further written submissions. Thank you
very much for your submission. Would you like to make an opening statement
or should we go straight to asking you questions?
MR BILBOE:
I think it would be best if we go straight to asking questions because
I am appearing here as a result of a subpoena.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you. Could you let us know, to start with, why did you leave Woomera?
MR BILBOE: Basically
my contract with ACM was not renewed at Woomera in December, although
I had given indications that I was willing to continue. I was offered
one month at Curtin. At the end of that period, again, no new contract
was offered. I believe - I can give an indication as to why I believe
that that occurred.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What would you think why it wasn't renewed?
MR BILBOE:
Raising too many concerns about what was happening in regards to the emotional,
psychological and physical well-being of both adult detainees and children
who had been in long term detention.
DR OZDOWSKI: You
were raising that with whom?
MR BILBOE: Sorry?
DR OZDOWSKI: With
whom were you raising these concerns?
MR BILBOE: These
concerns were raised with ACM management and also with DIMIA management.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could you tell us what are the main psychological problems facing children
in detention centres?
MR BILBOE: Many
of the children arriving in Australia from countries by boat, or whichever
way they come here, seeking asylum have experienced some form of trauma
in the land that they have left. Many of the unaccompanied minors that
we have in detention had witnessed extremely violent events. Some even
witnessing the murders of family members. I know of particular cases where
children witnessed their families being hit by missiles. So they arrived
here having experienced trauma, having a traumatic experience in the process
of coming here and then being re-traumatised by the very nature of the
detention process.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Are there any strategies in place to assist children with coping with
the fact of being in detention?
MR BILBOE:
It is very difficult to put into place strategies which assist children
who have been traumatised within a traumatic environment. Apart from providing
basic assessment, counselling and supports, shelter, minimalistic education,
minimal health care, within a wire cage, that's basically what's provided.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So what you are saying, as I understand, is that within the detention
centre complex, really the
MR BILBOE:
It's a no-win situation.
DR OZDOWSKI: needs
of kids cannot be taken properly.
MR BILBOE:
Cannot be achieved with long term therapeutic outcomes within that environment.
DR OZDOWSKI: We
heard in some other evidence that basically the role of a psychologist
in detention centre is to assist detainees to keep a holding pattern.
Would it be your experience too?
MR BILBOE:
The primary role of a psychologist, as I perceived it, was a no deaths
in custody policy. That was the aim. It was to achieve that we maintained
a situation where no detainee committed suicide.
DR OZDOWSKI: Is
it an official policy, or it's an understanding, or how does it work?
MR BILBOE: No,
it would not be stated as an official policy, but all the psychologists
are active members of the HRAT Team, which is the High Risk Management
Team, a primary role is to assess risk, to manage detainees who have self-harmed,
self-mutilated or are threatening suicide. I, myself, have witnessed some
horrific injuries on individuals, both adult and children. I have seen
people hanging off the fence and
DR OZDOWSKI:
By the neck?
MR BILBOE:
Hanging off the fence with sheets around their necks. With ACM officers
holding them up, basically, whilst they are cut down. I have seen people
up in trees slashing themselves up with razor blades and I must say that
while I am watching this children have been watching it as well.
DR OZDOWSKI: I
can clearly see it impacted on you, didn't it?
MR BILBOE:
An environment such as this can only impact on a professional when the
professional finds himself in a no-win situation, when the recommendations,
the therapies that they are trying to implement are being thwarted by
the very system that is supposed to be providing a protecting environment.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What would be impact of such involvement of children in your assessment?
MR BILBOE:
Well, my belief is that children arrive after experiencing trauma. The
very nature of detention is traumatising to the extent that we will inherit
children who are exhibiting symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder,
behavioural disturbance and increase social costs in providing care for
these people, as young adults and as older adults.
DR OZDOWSKI: Would
it have a long lasting impact on children, in your professional judgment,
or from the moment they are out will they be able to function normally?
Or within a reasonable period of time after they are released?
MR BILBOE:
I have extensive experience working in child protection prior to coming
into the area where I am now, and I would say that any child who has experienced
a trauma, be it sexual assault, physical assault, will have long term,
life-long, impact. It's what resources are made available to them in the
community afterwards that will diminish the level of that impact. But
there will be a long term impact.
DR OZDOWSKI:
As you know there are, in different states, different child protection
agencies which have legal responsibility, for looking after the well-being
of children. Quite often when you find a child in the broader community
who doesn't attend school or who is in a situation of conflict, or in
some other circumstances, the state authorities take a whole range of
steps to redress, or to address, the situation at least. How would you
compare the children in detention centre to the children in broader community
which attract attention of state officials?
MR BILBOE: There
is an ambiguity here in the legal system because any child in, say, New
South Wales who is living in an environment where they are being, or are
likely to be abused, there are statutory requirements to provide care,
well-being and, in fact, protection for that child. Even to the state
of removing that child from the environment that it is perceived that
it is not safe. I used to fulfil that role as a District Officer. Children
in detention come under some ambiguity because they are not under the
- covered by their State or Territory laws of Child Protection Acts. They
are on Commonwealth ground. Although, in Woomera, after the Flood Inquiry
we started involving FAYS.
It was very unclear
as to what their actual legal actions could be taken by them, as far as
protecting or removing children, because they were under the care of the
Minister of Immigration. Which raised a lot of ambiguities for me, and
probably led to the termination of my employment because I was raising
questions regarding who was the guardian, or the guardian ad litem, for
the unaccompanied minors. Because when you remove a child in New South
Wales, and take them into care, their guardian becomes the Minister for
Community Services. He becomes their parent, ad litem.
DR OZDOWSKI: Yes,
leaving the legal issues on the side, would children in detention facility
approach the definition of an abused child, or child at risk, which would
warrant some investigation if they would be outside detention?
MR BILBOE: Okay.
The definition of child abuse is a child who has been physically abused,
sexually abused, neglected or exposed to physical, exposed to emotional
and psychological risk. Every child in a detention centre fits within
one or more of those categories. Every child.
MS LESNIE:
Does that mean that you notified FAYS as to the risk of every single child
in Woomera?
MR BILBOE:
No, that would never be allowed to happen. FAYS were notified with specific
cases of children who presented with unexplained or injuries with an ambiguous
explanation. After the introduction of the new playgrounds in November
of last year, at Woomera, the beautiful ones that you see in the magazine
there, we had numerous injuries because these children had never played
on playgrounds such as those. They had no idea about appropriate or safe
playing on those grounds and, yes, you have beautiful one and a half inch
matting on top there which looks very pretty, but underneath it is hardpacked
ground. So when they fall off they might as well be landing on concrete.
MS LESNIE:
When you say you wouldn't have been allowed to notify
MR BILBOE:
No, no, it would be not practical. When we did notify FAYS the issue became
of what action could they take to actually intervene. What services could
they provide? Could they remove the children? No. Could they place them
in foster care? No. So it was a case of managing as best we could within
the facilities that we had.
MS LESNIE:
So what you mean is that you would have liked to have notified them but
there was no point because there was no feasible solution to it.
MR BILBOE:
No solution being offered.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So you didn't personally report any individual child?
MR BILBOE: Yes,
I did.
MRS SULLIVAN:
How many?
MR BILBOE:
It would be hard to specify exact numbers, but we notified families with
four or five children. We notified individual children as a team. It would
be in the 20s, 30s of individual children that were notified in South
Australia, going way back to a specific incident last year, the year before
last, which resulted in the Flood Inquiry and through to numerous incidences
last year. A lot of children were notified because of hunger strikes,
self mutilation.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And was each one of those investigated in some way?
MR BILBOE:
Yes. A lot of the investigations were done internally.
MS LESNIE: And
where there was an investigation and recommendations by FAYS were those
recommendations implemented by ACM or DIMIA?
MR BILBOE:
Not to my satisfaction.
MS LESNIE:
Could you give an example?
MR BILBOE: Well,
children who we felt should be removed from the centre, placed in community
foster care. It was only until this year that that's actually started
happening. Even UAMs who had been in detention for several months, they
only basically left detention earlier this year, although there were numerous
concerns regarding self harming, hunger strikes, their exposure to serious
acts of self harm by others, riots, demonstration, destruction of facilities
on a daily basis. What was happening, they were being moved from one compound
to another compound.
We had one child
that was in foster care with a family within the centre with a young child.
We strongly advocated for that child to be released with the family who
he had bonded with. It didn't happen. By the time I left that child had
been with five different families.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now, could you tell us more about self harm? Could you say something about
how often you witnessed it, what ages of children were involved and how
severe it was?
MR BILBOE: Self
harm ranged from incidences by definition of people who were, say, not
presenting for meals. They would come under HRAT, so we would be investigating
why they were not attending for meals. Were they on a hunger strike? A
lot of concerns were raised about children not attending or being on a
hunger strike. This was found in many cases to be untrue, however because
of the parents' level of distress, anxiety, depression, they were not
attending for meals so the children weren't attending.
Arrangements were
made for the children to attend with other detainees where the families
were quite seriously depressed and ill, officers would volunteer to escort
the children to the dining room. I can't say that I ever saw children,
I would say children under the age of, say, 14, who were actually on a
hunger strike. Children over the age of 14 who were involved in hunger
strikes, were mostly UAMs. As far as self harm is concerned in the cutting
area that was used - young children didn't actually have access to razor
blades unless they could get them from an adult.
Some of the UAMs
did have access to razor blades. They became involved in a cutting - now,
I try not to sound blase but the fact that I saw so many varieties of
cutting from superficial scratches to major lacerations, I would describe
theirs as minor scratching, but the fact that they were doing it was of
great concern.
DR OZDOWSKI: How
old were the youngest children doing it?
MR BILBOE:
About 14, that's with the razor blades. The other self harms were - with
the UAMs was becoming involved in the demonstrations, placing themselves
at risk by their involvement in some of the demonstrations. I have seen
young men who turned out to be UAMs cuffed, cuffing is with flexi cuffs.
I don't know if people here are aware of what they look like.
DR OZDOWSKI:
If you could describe it please.
MR BILBOE:
It's basically - it's a piece of plastic with two circles that go round
and through. You put them on a person's wrists and then you pull it to
a tension. You're supposed to pull it to no more than two fingers tight.
So there's no - it can move. The part that is concerning is that in many
cases during demonstrations and riots the cuffing was behind the back.
Persons were cuffed behind.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Including children?
MR BILBOE:
Including young males.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Females?
MR BILBOE: No.
I can't say that I saw a female cuffed at any stage. When they were identified
as being young minors, these cuffs were removed, however marks still existed
on their wrists. There were incidences involving where reports were made
by myself and my colleagues expressing concerns that the injuries sustained
on some of the detainees would raise concerns regarding the excessive
use of force. One needs to remember that the children were witnessing
these events.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now, you mentioned earlier hangings. How did you hear circumstances of
young people or children attempting to hang themselves?
MR BILBOE: I
am not aware of any young children attempting to hang themselves, but
I am aware of young children witnessing these events and seeing people
cut down. There is a specific case that I was involved in, involving a
young boy who became extremely distressed. That young boy was, prior to
my arrival at Woomera in September of 2000, described to me by teachers,
officers and other staff as being a relatively normal child, quiet, a
passive little boy. However he witnessed some very severe riots and demonstrations.
He witnessed a breakout.
He witnessed a person attempting to hang themself in a tree. The child
became extremely traumatised. I was unable to treat that child at Woomera
and made recommendations that that child be transferred. After the family
was rejected, the family was actually transferred into what was the high
security compound at Woomera.
DR OZDOWSKI: The
isolation cells?
MR BILBOE: This
is the - what was referred to as Oscar or Sierra Compound. There were
about four families that were moved into there. With regards to the strongest
possible objections from the psychologists about the inappropriateness
of placing women and children in the compound which was 80, 90 percent
male where a daily occurrence of self harm and self mutilation, threats
of riots. There was one family - this particular child was moved in there
with his family and again witnessed more events and deteriorated drastically
and I recommended that the child be removed from Woomera and I was told,
well, where do we send him? I said, To Sydney, because they have access
to Camperdown Children's Hospital and children's psychiatric services,
because I could not treat that child at Woomera.
Another family involving
three girls was placed in that compound. Those girls never left their
room.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Why was that so?
MR BILBOE: When
you've got about 200 males in a compound with three adolescent girls,
they didn't come outside. They had their meals in their room. We complained
and complained and complained about the inappropriateness of these sorts
of things and the emotional, psychological impact that this has on the
individual children and their families. Eventually the father of that
family signed a Repat and left, went back. He indicated to me that he
expected not to survive himself, but he believed it would be better to
go back and know what was going to happen than to stay here and watch
his family deteriorate.
DR OZDOWSKI: One
more thing regarding self harming, lip sewing, did you witness any of
lip sewing?
MR BILBOE:
I witnessed numerous occasions of lip sewing, going back from 2000/2001,
right through to just before I left. Mostly adults.
DR OZDOWSKI: With
adults, what about children?
MR BILBOE:
I have been asked on occasion did I witness lip stitching with children,
specifically UAMs, etcetera, and stories about adults stitching children's
lips. I only ever heard that statement come from the Minister's lips.
I never saw it at Woomera. I never witnessed it. I never saw any children
who had their lips stitched at Woomera.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Do you know of any parents encouraging children to do any self-harm?
MR BILBOE:
In fact, I only saw parents doing the opposite. Trying to - the interesting
part is that as a psychologist, being there, the time that I had, I had
the opportunity to build up relationships with families. So I was able
to encourage the families to start to change some of the cultural behaviours
which - it seemed that when there was a demonstration the whole family
would come out and watch, women and children, and what we were encouraging
them to do was to take the children back inside so that they were not
witnessing these events. To remove the children from the environments
where they were witnessing these events. Now, I cannot say that I saw
parents, at any stage, encouraging their children to self-harm, or harm
others.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I understand, or I was told, that there is an ACM policy to remove children
from any area of disturbance. Did you see children being removed from
their places when demonstrations were taking place?
MR BILBOE:
I have seen women and children standing at the gate asking to be removed
while the gate is locked. I find that an amazing statement, I am sorry.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes.
MR BILBOE: Because
in the middle of a riot or demonstration, apart from going in with a full-on
CERT team, water cannons, batons and tear gas, it would be impossible.
The only thing that we encouraged people to do, and women and children
to do, was to retreat back to their own rooms and to shut the door and
stay there. On occasions I have walked in with senior officers and escorted
families out, specific families.
DR OZDOWSKI: We
still are waiting for relevant pages of ACM manual to be provided for
evidence on that issue.
MR BILBOE: They
may be in a manual, but it would be impossible to implement.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now, you have possibly seen DIMIA submission, yes, which was provided
MR BILBOE:
Yes, I saw it this morning.
DR OZDOWSKI: outside
and it states that:
Care is taken not
to undermine the role of parents as primary care givers.
Would you wish to
comment on the issue of the role of parents of families in detention?
MR BILBOE:
It would - you cannot undermine the role of a parent as a care giver,
but you can undermine the role of a parent as in what facilities and resources
and services they can provide to their children. When you look at the
Woomera or Curtin environment what the parents can actually provide to
their children is extremely limited. So, apart from escorting the children
to meals, bathing the children, sharing rooms, the day to day care, that
would be about the basic thing that parents could provide.
DR OZDOWSKI: Can
family function normally in extended detention situation? Can family roles
be maintained, according to you?
MR BILBOE:
Family roles break down significantly. We actually started time-lining
the break down of individuals. We classify the first three months as being
a state of euphoria, hope, dreams. The next three months, as they are
going through all of their interviews and there is anxiety starting to
build up. After six months we start to see a deterioration in the emotional
and psychological well-being of individuals, a significant start in the
increase of self-harm. Be it hunger strikes, emotional anxiety, psychological
disturbances developing, increased requests for assistance for sleep,
which is an indication of depression, medication for depression, more
active involvement in disturbances and in self-harm. So, yes, I have seen
people age on a daily basis. I have seen middle age men become old men
in months.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Physically, looking old men, or mentally
MR BILBOE: Physically,
and relationships in the family breaking down because children start to
- are asking, "Why are we in detention? Why are we here?" Wives
asking, you know, "Why have you brought us here?" Wives whose
husbands are outside in the community asking why are they still in detention
when their husbands are outside? Not understanding the system. Young -
UAMs not understanding the system, not having someone to advocate for
them. No independent advocate.
DR OZDOWSKI:
When we go to detention centres quite often people are asking us very
basic questions, then when we ask DIMIA or ACM managers they are telling
us, "Well, we told them five times about X or Y". The question
is; Are they capable, after spending considerable time in detention, to
absorb information which is provided?
MR BILBOE:
There are certain things that they are not told. When immigrants - when
detainees first arrive they go through an initial screening process. There
is a terminology which generally is not used. That's called "screen
in" or "screened out". Detainees are not told that they
are screened in or that they are screened out. They can go three/four
months wondering what's happening until somebody lets them surreptitiously
become aware that there's a form that they can request where they can
apply again for refugee status because during their first interview they
didn't say the magic words that made them qualify to go on to the next
phase of refugee review. They didn't make statements indicating that they
were seeking asylum or that they were being victims of some form of abuse.
DR OZDOWSKI: I
am dominating you a bit, so maybe a last question from me before I will
ask my Assistant Commissioners to ask you a few questions. Did you do
any counselling for DIMIA staff or ACM officers there?
MR BILBOE: Yes,
I did.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What percentage, or how many, how often there was need for it?
MR BILBOE: Whenever
there was a disturbance I was involved in providing debriefing. Critical
incident debriefing, counselling and support. I also provided individual
counselling support to families, to individual staff members and families
outside of the centre. I also provided individual counselling and support
assessment. I wrote reports for management on individual members of staff
on the impact of events that they had been involved in.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So, it tends to suggest to me that they were impacted by working there.
That there was also a psychological harm happening to them?
MR BILBOE: No,
as I said earlier, no person working in a detention centre cannot be impacted
by that system because it is a situation where there appears to be no
outcome or solution, so you are dealing with people - you are dealing
on a day to day basis with individuals who have been traumatised, who
tell you their stories whether you want to believe them or not believe
them. As a psychologist my training is to believe what I am told until
proven otherwise. So I believe the stories that I am being told by these
individuals. I have seen the scars on these individuals from torture that
they have experienced in their homelands, and the officers hear these
stories as well on a day to day basis. Then they are involved in a disturbance
and they see the person who they have built a relationship with involved
in a disturbance, or become a victim of that disturbance, and so it does
have an individual impact, physically, emotionally and psychologically
with them. So, yes, they are impacted by it.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you. Professor Thomas, would you like to ask a question?
PROF THOMAS:
You said that when you arrived at the detention centres you were not provided
with the psychometric tools and you made submissions and requests and
no response was received. Can you tell me what kind of psychometric tools
you requested and you think that you need?
MR BILBOE:
Yes. At the time we didn't have any tools at all apart from very basic
tools which psychologists carry with them, like anxiety tool assessment
or depression scales. There is no specific tools for assessing trauma,
etcetera. I had with me an intern and we investigated, in consultation
with SYCORP, who is a provider of psychometric tools and ACER, another
provider of psychometric tools. We consulted with them regarding the appropriate
tools that could be used within an environment such as Woomera where the
predominant clientele are of non English speaking background.
So we wanted ethnic
and language neutral tools. We provided a list of those tools to management.
At the time it worked out to approximately $2400 for RAVENS, coloured
matrix, etcetera. Tools that were ethnic neutral, language neutral which
would give us an indication of the person's intellectual function, the
level of trauma, anxiety, depression. Therefore, we could make appropriate
referrals for psychiatric follow up or treatment programs, so we could
substantiate our cases because what we were finding as time went by, more
and more we were being called to the Refugee Review Tribunal to give reports
on the psychological well being of individuals and as psychologists our
field is based on clinical assessment, so we need those tools to provide
a clinical assessment and diagnosis treatment programs for individuals.
PROF THOMAS:
Considering the languages of most of the detainees that's what I'm just
wondering, Ravens is really is a cognitive assessment and how do you get
treatment for anxiety depression on the detainees' languages?
MR BILBOE:
There are assessment tools which are language neutral. Sorry, I can't
think of them off the top of my head, there's an ESI which is language
neutral, cultural neutral but before we put the list together we consulted
with the appropriate agencies to say, yes, these were the appropriate
tools and we provided the submission and the costing. Those tools were
never provided.
PROF THOMAS:
You worked at the ACM from October 2000 till December 2001 which probably
was the worst period and then you worked again until February 2002 which
is very recently, did you see any change in ACM procedures during nearly
about two years, did they learn the mistakes, did they improve at all?
MR BILBOE:
Interestingly it went from one extreme, started to move to a much nicer
environment and then came back full circle. I actually arrived at Woomera
on 7 September 2000, at that time it was a very correctional model. In
consultation with the management there, there was a recruitment program
to try and move away from having correctional staff to having detention
staff and for officers to be trained in a detention model.
But over the period
of time and I would say over the latter four months of last year, the
beginning of this year, we moved back towards a more arbitrary correctional
model.
DR OZDOWSKI: Why
is this so? How would you explain that?
MR BILBOE:
I think it was because we are dealing with people, especially within Woomera,
I just use Woomera as the model when I'm speaking, who are now in detention
for anything from 11, 16, 20 months in detention, so the level of reactive
behaviour, I use the old clinical phraseology of reactive behaviour, was
starting to become a daily occurrence. So to manage that reactive behaviour
they wanted people more experienced or more hard line.
That's when I started
writing reports regarding concerns about some of the injuries detainees
were presenting with following incidents would leave ACM open to allegations
of excessive use of force. I know that a number of inquiries were made
regarding that because, as I say, the injuries were not consistent with
just restraining somebody.
PROF THOMAS:
As a psychologist myself that's why I'm concerned about your work and
how effective can a psychologist be in a situation like that, for example,
do you use bags, do you carry with you Taylor's Anxiety Test, how do you
use it? Do you use it with interpreters and without those non-verbal tests,
how do you cope?
MR BILBOE:
I myself have worked overseas in Korea and have had quite extensive experience
of working with interpreters and I had a wonderful relationship with the
interpreters down in Woomera and sometimes I think they already knew what
questions I was going to ask before I asked them because I'd been there
for a while. I think the biggest mistake that ACM has made or with regards
to it, is the fact that they have tended to focus on continually rolling
over staff.
A therapeutic process
of any client is long term, developing a relationship, getting to know
the person's story, getting to know what's happening with that person
and then making appropriate treatment recommendations, etcetera. As I
said, I think and I believe that I did a good job in Woomera while I was
there. I have to believe that for my own well being but I also have to
acknowledge, that I was working in a no win environment because I couldn't
change the environment.
No matter how much
I worked with the clients, I couldn't change the cause of the behaviour,
the course of their stress, it's like having a patient coming into the
hospital with a nail through the hand and you are giving them Pethidine
injections for pain but you don't remove the nail. That's exactly what
is happening in Woomera. You've got people down there with nails through
their hands, we're holding them, we're not treating the cause. So, the
trauma, the torture, the infection is growing. We are not treating it,
we're just containing it. Eventually when those people return to their
homelands, if they don't get temporary visas, they are going to carry
that with them.
PROF THOMAS:
How did you find the relationship between the guards, officers, ACM officers
and the children?
MR BILBOE: From
one extreme to the other. A lot of the children learn some very basic
Australian English words, inappropriate words within the first few weeks
of being in Australia basically because they are being told to go away
but not in those words. They learnt to swear very fast, so they learn
quite vulgar language very quickly. But again, you cannot charge all officers
by the behaviour of a few.
Many of the officers
that I worked with, I'd work with them any day. They are doing the best
they can within a very hostile environment and the officers cannot change
the environment. But then again, you have the other officers who give
them an opportunity to bash somebody's head and they will, no qualms about.
So you are going from one extreme to the other.
PROF THOMAS:
Let's take the officers who are professional, who are human being or caring,
over time did you observe any change in their behaviour as a result of
the work there?
MR BILBOE:
I found many of the female officers became more and more distressed in
working in that environment as they saw families and children deteriorate
it had an impact on them. Some of the males became more aggressive, drinking
behaviour became a major problem, excessive consumption of alcohol is
quite common. Other nocturnal behaviour starts to appear, so yes, there
is a deterioration within relationships within the officers as well and
a deterioration in behaviour.
MS LESNIE:
Did that impact on the relationship between those officers and the children
and the families?
MR BILBOE:
It impacted in that they became more withdrawn from their interactions
with the detainees because you build up a relationship with a detainee,
you think you are helping that person and because of something that is
said by a DIMIA officer you have a riot that evening. So you are in there
a couple of hours later in riot gear trying to contain a situation which
wasn't created by you but you are now confronted with the person who you
thought was your friend throwing stones at you or trying to hit you with
a piece of wood and you are there with a shield, a water can and batons
trying to contain, yes, it's a love/hate situation.
One minute you love
each other and the next minute you are there you hate each other. But
I've had detainees come and apologise for their behaviour. The only time
I was ever assaulted myself at Woomera was when I was forced to wear an
officer's uniform, that's the only time in my whole experience that I
was
DR OZDOWSKI:
That's in a way interesting but for us it was quite surprising to see
teachers, psychologists and so on in ACM uniforms. You are saying you
didn't wear one?
MR BILBOE:
I didn't wear a uniform up until the last four months of my being - -
-
DR OZDOWSKI:
Why it was a change?
MR BILBOE:
Change of management.
DR OZDOWSKI:
All right, so new management required you to wear it?
MR BILBOE:
A directive from Sydney to wear a uniform although I was told by another
senior executive officer at Woomera that I didn't, I wasn't required to
wear a uniform. I could wear my, even if I wore a uniform I could wear
whatever ties I liked because they wanted me to not be seen as an officer
but I was directed to wear a uniform. I complied and within a couple of
weeks I was actually, there was a riot and basically I couldn't run fast
enough.
PROF THOMAS:
Did you see any abuse of power by the staff? I was thinking of experiments
really we all know?
MR BILBOE:
As I said I have written reports expressing concerns regarding the excessive
use of force. I was approached by one ACM manager following a riot asking
me did I feel that the officers had crossed the line and I did say at
that stage that no, I did not feel that there was an excessive use of
force on that day. However, a couple of days later I did see an officer
restraining person drop down on to that person's back with their knee.
Now, it doesn't take six officers to restrain one person and then to have
another one come along and drop down on that person with their knee. That
matter was reported.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Mrs Sullivan.
MRS SULLIVAN:
I just wanted to focus on one element of life in the centre and that's
the accommodation. What impact do you think that type of accommodation
has on children specifically but family life more generally?
MR BILBOE:
There is no family accommodation at Woomera. You have demountables, you
have the old concrete block buildings down there. Most of the accommodation
is shared. The ones where you may have a family, the only difference is
it's an open room and they may string up blankets or something like that
to create a division for some privacy. In the new compounds they built
rooms which are basically dormitories, no doors apart from a door at either
end where you enter and leave the building, so you have a common lounge
room area with a sink and a refrigerator, no stove, TV which is another
thing which is not relatively common; TVs and newspapers were only introduced
last year, they weren't there when I first arrived, but these accommodations
are 16 bed dormitories so you may have four, five families in the one
dormitory. So there's no accommodation which is a family specific accommodation,
even back in the old days. When I first came to Australia as a child we
had the old Nissan huts, we had family accommodation which parents had
their room, we had ours. That doesn't exist.
DR OZDOWSKI: Sorry,
let's not include that.
MR BILBOE:
No, you have toilet blocks, laundry blocks, so you have to walk across
the compound night or day if you want to go to the bathroom.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So if you have a few kids, during the night it could be - - -
MR BILBOE:
In Woomera there are four, I think it's four units for new borns and that's
for only for six months. So if you have someone who has a newborn child
they get, go into there. It has an en suite bathroom but, again, you may
have one couple in this one room, you have an en suite in the middle and
another room at the other end, so you may have two families with new born
children using that one bathroom, so it's not specific to, it's not like
your own little demountable. It would be nice if we had something like
the modern caravan parks where you have the little demountable huts with
their own en suites and bathrooms, especially for young couples with kids.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So the impact on family life in summary?
MR BILBOE:
If it continues for a long time which most of the ones who are in Woomera
are now, I can only perceive long term detrimental impact on the family,
an increase in relationship breakdown and an increase in appropriate delinquent
behaviour within the children with possible long term post traumatic stress
disorders both in the adults and children.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I perhaps follow with one question here. Quite often when the issue of
releasing children from detention facility dates come into public the
minister is saying that okay the Convention on the Rights of the Child
is saying the children should be detained for as short as possible period
of time and as a matter of last resort. The Convention is also quite strong
on the family unit, that the family should be kept together so, consequently,
the Minister is reaching the conclusion that children shouldn't be released
from the family situation because it would be breaking family down. What
you are saying is that possibly the family is already broken down, isn't
it? How would you manage it, these two objectives?
MR BILBOE:
One of the best suggestions I ever heard actually came from a Country
Party member during the last election campaign when he was saying or suggested
that these families should be put out into rural communities in voluntary
detention so they actually live in a rural community in a voluntary detention
situation but they agree to stay within that community while their applications
are processed. I have no objection with detention, don't get me wrong,
I have no objection with detention for its original purpose which is clearance
for medical screening such as for disease, stuff like that, but when you're
talking about detention that's gone three months, six months, twelve months,
two years, I have serious professional concerned about the psychological
well being of not only the children but every individual within those
detention centres.
Primarily my concern
being here today and one of the reasons why I cane here was UAMs. UAMs
in detention. It's only this year that UAMs have been fostered out. It
wasn't happening before that. It's only because of the level of publicity
that's been going on that that has occurred. One question I ask is, we
talk about your children in detention: who is the guardian of the UAMs,
who is their guardian ad litem? Who is there advocate when they first
arrive? When they have their first hearing there is no one there to guide
them, no one there to help them.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I think the immigration submission is saying that there is a case management
for each UAM that as soon as they arrive they are being assessed and managed
throughout the system. Are you aware of this?
MR BILBOE:
Who is their case manager?
DR OZDOWSKI:
I assume it would be ACM officers.
MS LESNIE:
A DIMIA manager. What the DIMIA submission says is that there's an appointment
of a UAM officer, a particular officer - - -
MR BILBOE:
UAM officers are changed on a rotary basis, they are only a relatively
new occurrence. A UAM officer is responsible for the day to day care of
the UAM. They do not attend hearings, they do not attend their meeting
with DIMIA, they are not trained in advocacy, they are not trained welfare
psychologists, they are not trained in legal affairs, they are not advocates,
they are not independent, they are employees of ACM who are contractual
to DIMIA, so they are not an independent advocate. My question is who
is their independent advocate appointed by their guardian. Their guardian
is the minister, he is to all intents and purpose their father, you know.
In New South Wales, in a community situation he probably would find himself
before a children's court.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Do you have anything further?
MRS SULLIVAN:
Just one brief one. I guess there's been a refrain through your statements
of being blocked, your advice being blocked or not taken notice of. Are
you able to identify the source of that blockage or was it multitudinous?
MR BILBOE:
It's a multitudinal thing. When you make too many complaints whether you're
a nurse, a doctor, psychologist, your contract doesn't get renewed, basically
that's what happens with it. So when doctors - I have witnessed this -
doctors make complaints about the inappropriate medical treatment their
contracts don't get renewed. When nurses complain their contracts don't
get renewed. When psychologists complain their contracts don't get renewed.
MRS SULLIVAN:
You're currently working in a correctional centre?
MR BILBOE: Yes.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Can I ask whether the same culture prevails in other institutional settings
that you have worked in?
DR OZDOWSKI: How
does it compare?
MR BILBOE:
I was very specific in my acceptance of this appointment. I didn't want
to work in a gaol environment ever again. The position that I've accepted
is a psychologist within a pre-release correctional facility. I am working
with people who know when they are going to be released and are preparing
to go back out into the community so we know where we're going, we know
what we're trying to achieve, we're developing their day, not week; they
are developing their own plans for when they go back out into the community
so as to minimise the risk of re-offending. They don't want to come back
to gaol. So we've actually got a goal we can focus on which is what you
don't have in detention.
MRS SULLIVAN:
I will ask it one more way. Given institutional cultures is there anything
atypical about detention centres in terms of your experience or would
you be likely to have those experiences of blockage if you worked in other
institutions?
MR BILBOE:
I think what's atypical about detention is the lack of knowledge. You
don't know if, when, you are going to get released. I could be seeing
someone this afternoon and tomorrow they're gone and it was only the middle
of last year that we finally got DIMIA to start to let us know when people
were being released so I could write discharge reports that could go with
them, with their medical certificates and their referrals to their doctors
so that doctors would get a report from me as a treating psychologist
recommending any follow ups that might be needed, any further treatments
or provisional diagnoses that I have made. So it's been an evolutionary
thing within the detention system but basically I would say over last
eight months it seems to have deteriorated.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Thank you and as a non psychologist I did get the message of your tie.
MR BILBOE:
That's one of the things I do get commented on, is my ties and my vests.
It seems to be my trademark.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did you work in a prison before?
MR BILBOE:
No. I never worked in detentions or gaols before working with ACM. Prior
to that I worked in a hospital, mental health, community mental health,
child protection.
DR OZDOWSKI:
We will have to conclude. Would you like to make a concluding statement?
MR BILBOE: Only
that I hope the information that I've provided is of assistance to you.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much, Mr Bilboe it is of assistance. Now, the final session
will be held in camera.
SHORT BREAK [12.28pm]
CONTINUED IN TRANSCRIPT-IN-CONFIDENCE
CONTINUED FROM
TRANSCRIPT-IN-CONFIDENCE [2.05pm]
DR OZDOWSKI: Well,
I would like to start the afternoon hearings. My name is Sev Ozdowski
and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner and I've got two Assistant Commissioners
with me. Mrs Robin Sullivan, Queensland Children's Commissioner, to the
left, and Dr Trang Thomas who is a Professor of Psychology at the Royal
Melbourne Institute of Technology, to my right. I am also assisted by
Ms Vanessa Lesnie who is Secretary to the Inquiry.
I made some rulings
about confidentiality about individual information to protect the privacy
of people and I would like to ask that in evidence no names are mentioned.
Either of refugees or said parties who will not have an opportunity to
address this hearing. To start with I would like to ask you to take an
oath of affirmation.
PAULA CRISTOFFANINI,
affirmed [2.06pm]
SENIOR MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
STEVE KARAS, sworn
[2.06pm]
PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
MARK MANTLE, affirmed
[2.06pm]
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COUNTRY RESEARCH AT THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL
DR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you very much. Now, could I ask your for the records to state your names,
addresses, qualifications and the capacity in which you are appearing?
MR KARAS: Steve
Karas, Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal in Sydney. And
on my right is - do you want me to introduce them, Mr Chairman?
DR OZDOWSKI: I
think they can do it for themselves.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
I am a Senior Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal. Did you want the
addresses did you say?
DR OZDOWSKI:
Addresses, yes please give your address.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
[Address removed].
MR MANTLE:
My name is Mark Mantle, I am the Assistant Director of Country Research
at the Refugee Review Tribunal in Sydney and my address is [address removed].
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much. Mr Karas, could I ask you to make an opening statement?
MR KARAS:
Yes thank you, Mr Chairman, I was going to ask your permission to do so
since you've invited me - thank you very much for the invitation - to
give evidence to the inquiry here this afternoon. You have already had
introduced to you the people who are accompanying me. Paula Cristoffanini
is accompanying me because she is experienced in the conduct of cases
and hearings for applicants in detention, many of whom include families
with children. I've asked her to come along in case she can be of assistance
to the Tribunal.
Mr Mantle is the
head of our research area in the Tribunal. One of the reasons I had asked
him along is that I noticed in some of the submissions that you had received
there were some suggestions that the Tribunal's country information resources
are limited, or narrow. I wanted to point out to yourself, Mr Chairman,
and to the other Commissioners that in fact that is incorrect and I wanted
to assure the Inquiry that the resources available to Tribunal members
for country research are very extensive and that the members draw on a
very wide range of information available from the government, from NGO,
academic and other sources. I have asked Mr Mantle to elaborate on that
should you want him to later on.
To assist the Inquiry
I have prepared three documents and there are also some other documents
which I would like to give you, but I would just like to refer quickly
and briefly to the three documents that we have prepared for yourself
and the other Commissioners. The first is a brief guide to the Tribunal's
roles and procedures. It is by no means a comprehensive document in relation
to them but I think it will provide you with an overview of the role and
functions of the Tribunal.
The second document
responds to your request for information on various matters which were
set-out in your letter to me of 8 July 2002. And we're quite happy to
speak to it and take whatever questions you'd like to ask of myself and
the others here with me. The Guide to Procedures I've provided may assist
in setting the broader context for responses to your particular questions
which were set-out in that letter which I've just referred to.
The third document
which we will provide to you contains statistical information on minors
in detention who have had reviews before the Tribunal over the last three
financial years. I think you will see from those statistics that this
category of cases has been less than about two per cent of the overall
case-load for the Tribunal during those years.
If I could just make
a few further comments before turning to your questions, Mr Chairman.
You would be aware that the Refugee Review Tribunal has been described
as an inquisitorial or non-adversarial Tribunal. As a result of that it
is one where there is no adversarial conduct of cases and the members
themselves do have quite a role in eliciting information and evidence
before them.
I would like to emphasise
a couple of points if I may, Mr Chairman. First that the Tribunal is not
an appeal body as such. It's confined, simply, to determining if there
has been some error by the primary decision-maker. In other words, the
Tribunal - to use a common description of its role as a merits review
body - stands in the shoes of the original decision-maker and reconsiders
the matter afresh. That is, it provides a merits review.
Secondly, there is
no onus of proof on the applicant. In other words, the person isn't asked
to prove whether he or she is a refugee. It is the Tribunal's role to
examine all of the evidence, make its own inquiries if necessary, and
be satisfied that the applicant is entitled to Australia's protection
under the Refugee Convention.
My third point, Mr
Chairman, is that the Tribunal is bound to apply the laws of Australia
- as enacted by Parliament and as interpreted by the Courts - when determining
if a person is a refugee. The term "refugee" is, not unsurprisingly,
used by many in the media and the community to describe a range of people
whose circumstances may be unfortunate, indeed tragic. However, the Tribunal
has no power to make a decision that a person is entitled to Australia's
protection purely on the basis of compassionate or humanitarian grounds.
Nor can the Tribunal make assumptions or decisions about broad groups
of people. Each applicant's case is assessed on its individual merits.
Mr Chairman, Parliament
has determined that applicants have no right of representation in the
Tribunal. In practice, however, I wanted to inform yourself and the other
Commissioners, that applicant's representatives are given an opportunity
to make submissions before, during and after any hearing. Again, in practice,
no representative of the Department attends the hearing although the Secretary
may, on occasions, make submissions to the Tribunal and the Secretary
has done so from time-to-time in relation to conditions in certain countries
for example.
There will always
be a debate about the merits of an inquisitorial process compared to an
adversarial process but, as I have indicated, the Australian Parliament
has opted for an inquisitorial model. Primarily because I think it is
seen as a quicker, more efficient and fairer model for applicants who
are usually unable, or unlikely, to be able to afford the cost of formal
representation before an adversarial body. Of course, you would be aware,
that the inquisitorial Tribunal that the Refugee Review Tribunal is also
similar to other merits Tribunals.
Could I also turn
to the issue of members' independence? The Tribunal members are completely
independent from direction as to how they decide a case. Neither I, the
Minister, or anyone can tell a Member what evidence to accept, or reject,
or what decision to make. Members are appointed by the Governor-General
for fixed terms of up to five years and of the present members on the
Tribunal, most were appointed in July 2001 and have three-year terms expiring
in July 2004.
If I may, Mr Chairman,
I would just like to take the opportunity to refer to some comments made
by the Law Society of New South Wales and the Beijing Committee - being
I understand a joint committee of the International Committee of Jurists
Western Australia Chapter and the Womens Lawyers Incorporated Western
Australia - which appear in submissions of those two organisations to
your Inquiry.
First the Law Society's
submission incorrectly states that performance reviews of members are
conducted on a six monthly basis and that those members' remittal rates,
and I think by remittal rates the reference is really to what we call
set aside rates are used as a basis for assessing the member's performance.
I just wanted to inform the Inquiry that members are not subject to six
monthly reviews of the nature described.
While members are
expected to make a certain number of decisions each year and to abide
by the Tribunal member code of conduct, they are independent and ultimately
must make a decision on the facts as they find them and according to law.
Of course as the principal member of the Tribunal I am concerned to ensure
as far as possible that the Tribunal's decisions are consistent. To achieve
this members are required to participate in professional development and
training programs and to acquaint themselves with current and relevant
information about applicants' countries.
The Beijing committee's
submission suggests that the Tribunal has little investigative capabilities
and resources and I wanted to inform the Inquiry that this is quite wrong.
The Tribunal has attained an international reputation as having an outstanding
independent research capability. The Tribunal research area recently hosted
a conference of country researchers from a wide range of refugee determination
agencies from far as afield as Canada, a number of European countries,
Norway, Switzerland, the United States and New Zealand, at which our activities
received widespread professional praise.
Indeed one of our
researchers is currently in Dublin assisting the Irish government's refugee
determination authorities in establishing a country information research
facility in that country. Mr Chairman and commissioners thank you for
the opportunity to make those preliminary observations. I and my colleagues
are here and we're happy to answer any questions which you may have and
if we are unable to answer them we are quite happy to take them on notice
and make that information available to you.
Should you require
any clarification of any matters or if you want something further as you
develop your final report by all means do not hesitate to contact the
Tribunal.
MR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you Mr Karas. Possibly the best way of handling your submission
would be to take the three documents you mentioned into evidence and to
consider them and if we have any questions which relate to these three
documents
MR KARAS:
I am just handing now to you a number of documents which we have prepared
for you which do contain some statistical information, some documentation
like brochures which the Tribunal has, a couple of letters which we do
sent out to applicants as such, also a multilingual sheet which is an
attachment there and general information which we think will be of assistance
to you and I have got an extra copy here should you want one.
MR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you. The documents are taken into evidence and I reserve the right to
write to you and ask you some explanatory questions if it is needed.
MR KARAS:
Of course Mr Chairman, thank you.
MR OZDOWSKI: Could
I ask Mr Mantle to mention a few words about the country specific assessments,
how do you do the research, how do you go about it.
MR MANTLE: How
we go about it?
MR OZDOWSKI:
And if you could maybe focus on a group of Sabean Mandaeans because they
are people who we were meeting recently in the centres and they were expressing
various concerns to us so could you perhaps describe the process?
MR MANTLE:
Well there are two streams of research we would undertake in the country
research. One stream is where we go out and collect information generally
on countries of origin and countries involved in the refugee determination
process. That forms about half of our work. The other half revolves around
responding directly to questions from members, specific questions about
cases and applicants that they would be working on.
MR OZDOWSKI: Where
do you collect information from?
MR MANTLE: We
have quite a wide range of sources. I think it is better if I categorise
them by group. First, from government sources, that is our own Department
of Foreign Affairs who provide advice; Immigration and Refugee Board of
Canada; US Department of State; UK Home Office; European governments:
Danish Immigration Service springs to mind, they conduct fact finding
missions in countries, we have access to their reports.
We also refer to
various NGOs, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, minority rights
groups, organisations like that who release material; UNHCR of course,
we also have a good relationship with them and source material from them.
We have access to CISNET which is the Department of Immigration and Multicultural
and Indigenous Affairs country information database.
We also subscribe
to an online use retrieval database called FACTIVA which has some 8,000
newspapers, journals, magazines and material that we can access from our
own desktops. We have in the last couple of years developed quite a strong
network of both local and international academics that we can call upon
to give expert advice. We can task UNHCR and the International Organisation
for Migration amongst others and ask specific questions of them, and they
provide advice to us. Most of the material we collect we store on our
own databases so it can be referenced whenever possible or we go externally,
as I said, to outside agencies for help.
Now regarding your
questions about Sabean Mandaeans, the way our research unit is structured
we have a total of 17 research staff across Sydney and Melbourne. In the
Sydney office we have three discrete teams that look after different parts
of the world. One teams looks after the Middle East and there are four
researchers involved in that team because the Middle East comprises quite
a high level of workload for that area. The researchers would search the
sources that I described earlier, for specific material on Sabean Mandaeans.
I could not answer
off the top of my head what that is I would have to go back to our office
and collect the material, but I would be more than happy to provide the
kind of material that we've gathered on Sabean Mandaneans.
MR OZDOWSKI: I
would like to ask you to take this question on notice and to provide us
with this information.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Can I just say that of course the members may have collected some
information by themselves as well so whilst the research group might be
able to give you a list of things that they have collected, it may not
be an exhaustive list of sources used by the Tribunal as their total in
cases relating to Sabean Mandaeans. For example, then you have - because
I have taken some cases involved with Sabean Mandaeans who have great
differences as well whether you are talking about Iraq or Iran and so
on. So then you are going to have specific information as to their situation
in Iran or their situation in Iraq and so on.
MR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you. So in the time remaining I would like to focus on a few issues and
would like to ask you Mr Karas to focus on the issues relating to people
who are in detention. I am not interested in your overall responsibility
for all cases. Could you perhaps put some lines on the time factors. How
long does it take on average to process applications coming from people
from detention?
MR KARAS:
Well over the years, the last three years it has varied from about 67.7
days to 75.1 days for the current financial year. The reason why I mention
those days is we have an internal target if I can use that expression,
in relation to dealing with detention cases within 70 days of the application
coming to the Tribunal. When the application does come to the Tribunal
of course we have to go back to the department to get the department file,
then the matter is allocated to a member and the member is expected to
complete the matter within 70 days of receipt of
MR OZDOWSKI: From
the of allocation?
MR KARAS: From
the moment of allocation to the member and I am able to say that this
past year 2001/2002 financial year, just a little over 73 per cent of
the cases were completed within that time period and we're talking about
84 detention applications for that year.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Sorry, they are only the ones involving children.
MR KARAS:
Sorry that is what I was referring to or did you mean overall
MR OZDOWSKI:
That's fine.
MR KARAS:
I was talking about children in detention I thought that was the subject
of the Inquiry.
MR OZDOWSKI:
And what kind of cases didn't meet that 70 days requirement?
MR KARAS:
Sorry when you say what type of case
MR OZDOWSKI: Yes,
you said about 70 per cent were finished within the time
MR KARAS:
Yes, well others may be extended a little longer on the basis that they
were waiting for other information to come in, people may not have been,
or the applicants may not have been ready for a hearing if one was being
organised. In most cases, in fact I think in all of the cases to which
I have been referring to, the 84 cases that we had this year, they have
been represented and it may have been also that a representative may not
have been ready and the representative may have wanted to make submissions
or so but usually there is an onus on members to deliver a decision within
70 days of the matter being allocated to them and as I've said in a little
over 73 per cent of the cases we've been able to meet that.
DR OZDOWSKI: What
were the longest cases in this category?
MR KARAS:
I don't have that in front of me but I don't think - it would have been
around about the 100 days or thereabouts.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I see, so it's not a question of a year or two, it's a question of
MR KARAS:
No, it's not a question of a year or two, in fact I have heard that there
have been suggestion that cases with the Tribunal have involved people
who have been in detention for a couple of years but that may include,
Mr Chairman, the decision having been made by the Tribunal then a delay
and it going to the Federal Court and then coming back from the Federal
Court to the Tribunal for the matter to be re-heard again or re-dealt
with again.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now, looking
MS LESNIE: Sorry,
could I just ask, do people from the - the detainees in question come
to the hearings at the RRT?
MR KARAS:
No. In the past
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Detainees come to the hearing
MS LESNIE: So
people might be flown from Port Hedland to Sydney or
MR KARAS:
No. In the past members had gone to detention centres but now the majority
of cases are dealt with by video conferencing facilities. Detention centres
do have video conferencing facilities, we do have them at the Tribunal
and for that reason they're dealt with in that manner.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
The detainees in Villawood or in Melbourne detention centres would
attend in person.
MS LESNIE:
Have you noticed any differences in holding hearings by video conference
as opposed to in person?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Do you want me to answer that? We've actually been asked that on several
occasions particularly when we started doing cases in bulk by video. We
were asked by the liaison committee to look at that and if anything what
it showed us, the statistics showed that there was a slightly higher success
rate for people who had had hearings by video but I don't think it was
a particularly significant. But we have looked at that.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Your submission notes that in the procedural guide for members you mention
this, there is a special chapter which provides otherwise on the consideration
of cases involving minors as applicants. Could you let me know when this
chapter was included?
MR KARAS: Yes,
I could. I think it may have been around 2000 or thereabouts but I stand
to be corrected on it and might I inform you, Mr Chairman, that the Tribunal
is about to complete guidelines for taking evidence from children. We've
been working on that for some months now. It's almost completed, we're
just waiting on a couple of more comments to come in from some members
or so and when that is completed I'm happy to make a copy available to
the Inquiry.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
The procedural guide was October 2001.
MR KARAS:
October 2001.
DR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you.
MRS SULLIVAN:
In developing those guidelines for questioning children and young people
have you used other similar documentation as precedent or have you started
with a blank sheet of paper?
MR KARAS:
It's been a sort of joint effort between the Migration Review Tribunal
and the Refugee Review Tribunal which I'm principal member of the both
and the reason for that is that it arises on both Tribunals to take in
requests from people or children and as a result of that it was thought
best that it be a joint effort and the compilation of the paper I understand
may have drawn on these references to cases and things of that type and
it's one which we think would adequately cover the circumstances with
which we have to deal with.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Because there are a number of similar documents in other jurisdictions
and I guess my second question is, has that document been sent out to
critical friends including some obvious people who were interested in
the child advocacy area?
MR KARAS:
No, not at this stage. It's been within the Tribunal and as I say we're
just waiting on comments from the members as such.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Is it the intent to send it to a wider audience?
MR KARAS:
It wasn't intended because it's an internal document which would be available
for members as a guideline, much as is our member's handbook and the other
material as such but we'd be happy to make copies available to you as
I said once it's completed, which I expect will be in the next week or
two.
DR OZDOWSKI: What
practical measures are involved when you are dealing with
MR KARAS:
It talks about sensitivities, you know, treating the children with concern
and that sort of thing; practical examples, Mr Chairman, of how one can
not so much appear friendly but put the person at ease, the child at ease
and take into account that it is a child.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did members have any training in this area?
MR KARAS:
Members do have training as I mentioned in my opening statement on professional
basis as such and we do invite people in from the torture and trauma associations
and other similar bodies to address the members from time to time. Paula
is involved more heavily than I in that and she may wish to add something.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Certainly there was an emphasis at the last training session of torture
and trauma on the issue of taking evidence from minors but it is also
emphasised to members that they need to be satisfied that they have been
able to obtain information, evidence, freely so that's something that
members are very, you know, concerned to do and make sure that they do
at hearings; whether it is from adults who have particular requirements
or from minors.
DR OZDOWSKI:
In your experience of dealing with unaccompanied minors was there sufficient
legal assistance provided to them?
MR KARAS:
I think in all of the cases that have come before the Tribunal they've
always been represented, Mr Chairman.
DR OZDOWSKI:
All of them?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
All of them.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Now, when you are dealing with minors are you taking into consideration
their mental state? We have had much evidence that they are severely traumatised
through the detention system. Do you consider it when you're talking to
them?
MR KARAS: If
you mean do we call for a mental evaluation or so, I would say that as
a matter of course that wouldn't be done unless there was something specific
in relation to a member conducting a hearing that that person thought
that they may have needed some medical evaluations or assessment or so.
I don't think in the normal course of events they would.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
You wouldn't necessarily but I mean you would need to be satisfied that
their witness is able to give evidence.
MR KARAS: Understand
the question, understand the oath and all that sort of thing and if one
wasn't then one wouldn't proceed to take evidence from the child one would
assume.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
And I think it's important to understand that some of the minors who are
listed here having, you know, in detention would be accompanied by their
elders, I mean their parents or other older applicants and so you may
not need to take evidence necessarily so the fact that there's been 84
cases or so on it may not mean that you've taken evidence from all of
those children. You might have taken evidence from the parents for example.
MS LESNIE:
How do you decide when you're taking evidence from the children and when
from the parents and when both?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Okay. I mean generally the Tribunal member needs to make a decision
as to because they have a responsibility to make the relevant inquiries
if you've been able to satisfy the inquiries by taking evidence from the
adults that is sufficient, well, that's fine. It is for the applicants
themselves also to determine who's going to come to the hearing or not,
so for example when you would have - you invite applicants to a hearing
all the applicants will be nominated but it would be up to them whether
they want to attend the hearings so you may have the situation of a family
where you have the two adult applicants attending the hearing and the
children not necessarily involved.
MS LESNIE:
And that will be their decision rather than yours?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Yes. That might be their decision and the Tribunal member for example
if there was an issue that they wanted to pursue they may discuss with
their adult applicant, I would like to also take evidence from your child.
There might be other instances where, you know, you're talking about an
infant, there'd be no point in pursuing it.
DR OZDOWSKI:
The last question from me before I will ask my Assistant Commissioners
to put their questions. I understand that last financial year about 70
per cent of all decisions regarding Afghanis were set aside and about
87 per cent of all decisions relating Iraqis and my understanding is also
that when one looks at other ethnic communities only eight per cent of
decisions were set aside. Could you explain this major discrepancy regarding
decisions from other communities and from Afghani and Iraqi communities?
MR KARAS:
Well, as I tried to indicate, each case has to be decided on the individual
facts of that particular case as such. I think I did indicate that we
don't decide it on the basis of broad groupings and things of that type
and I think you will find in looking at the statistics that on occasions
there are sort of peaks and troughs, so to speak, when and there are two
examples you have given where the particular applicants in those particular
circumstances were able to show that from the evidence Australia owed
them protection, that was found to be the case; whereas, if you look at
other countries and other groupings, sorry, other countries which have
applicants or their nationals coming before the Tribunals because of the
evidence and the circumstances as presented it's found that Australia
doesn't owe them obligations and that can explain the discrepancies in
the figures in cases like Iran and Afghanistan where you've mentioned
they were particularly high and in other countries, for argument's sake,
Fiji or the Philippines, they might be as low as you've indicated or even
lower.
MR MANTLE:
From a research perspective with regard to Afghanistan, the period you
are talking about, the situation was quite volatile, it was fluid, the
information coming out of Afghanistan was still of mixed quality. I think
certain members were of the opinion that allowing for the information
coming out of Afghanistan at that time they weren't convinced that the
applicants weren't at risk in returning to Afghanistan.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
The other thing is there is an issue to do also with the applicants themselves.
For example, in the case of Malaysia 701 applicants who were invited to
appear did not come to a hearing, only 124 applicants came to a hearing,
so they are people who have chosen for reasons of their own not to pursue
their case beyond the application.
DR OZDOWSKI:
But here it looks that the primary decision maker makes mistakes much
more often in certain ethnic categories than others.
MR KARAS:
Not necessarily. It may be in those circumstances there was more information
provided to the member, to the Tribunal, the passage of time allowed them
to obtain further documentation. Our country research was able to get
information which indicated that perhaps the countries, both of which
we referred to weren't as stable as they may have been in the circumstances.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
And changes in law as well.
DR OZDOWSKI: But
we are talking about three months difference between primary decision
making and the decision you make and looking at Iraq, not really much
has changed during the last few years so I don't think that our knowledge
would that rapidly evolve.
MR KARAS:
As I indicated, we are not there or our role isn't to say that the department
got it wrong, ours is to review the applications that come before us on
the merits and to look at all the facts and circumstances in relation
to it and it maybe, as I've said, that for the reasons of more evidence
other documentations, submissions, period of time that elapsed even though
it may be a couple of months, things that have come in and the member
in dealing with that particular case has come to the conclusion that he
or she has.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you, Mrs Sullivan.
MRS SULLIVAN:
I do apologise if these are simple questions because I haven't had time
to read the documentation you've just tabled but my questions are based
on some experience of another Tribunal and that's the context from which
I'm coming. Presumably you receive the files from the Department and to
assist you in hearing the case afresh, are you confident that you get
all the relevant files?
MR KARAS: Under
the legislation the secretary has to provide all the information to the
Tribunal which is relevant for our determination as such and normally
the whole file is provided.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
That is correct, and if you think that there is another file you can
ask for it.
MR KARAS:
Always ask.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
You'd find that a lot of the cases, a very large proportion of the cases
in detention the applicants themselves are conducting an FOI so they also
have access to most of the information before us and they would be able
to bring to our attention if there was something else that hey felt wasn't
before us.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Including the first record of first interview, they can get access to?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
The very first interview not in all cases. Whatever the notes are on the
file they would have access to, yes.
MR KARAS: Whatever
is on the file.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
You need to sort of discuss that with
MRS SULLIVAN:
No, you would have access though to the record of the first interview?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
We can, the first interview after they arrive there's generally, you
have access to the notes of the interview; in some cases you may want
to go back and have a look at the tape. I just don't know whether they
used to have tapes all along or only recently but it might not necessarily
be on the file when you get the file and if you want, if you need it you
would have to seek it.
MR KARAS:
You would have to ask for it.
MRS SULLIVAN:
I would have thought that's a fairly basic document that one would look
at.
MR KARAS:
We don't attach the tapes of our hearings onto the file as such they're
held elsewhere.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
There is a record
MRS SULLIVAN:
No, I'm talking about in reviewing the case anew one presumably starts
at the first point of the process which is that of initial interview.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Not necessarily, I mean the first point of the process is their application
for refugee status. The initial interview precedes that. See, they have
an interview initially when they first arrive in Australia which is not,
is prior to the application for a protection, so yes, we do have access
to the tapes of the interview relating to the protection application.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And that is a standard part of what you receive?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Yes.
MRS SULLIVAN:
But the person themselves doesn't necessarily have that?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
They would have access to that. What they may not have is access to the
tape if any of the interview that was made when they first arrived within
the first few days of arrival and that is not an interview for the purpose
of their application for protection, it precedes that application for
protection.
MR KARAS:
There's also a statutory requirement on the Tribunal under section 424A
which if there's any material which the Tribunal is going to rely on to
make a finding against the applicant all that has to be made available
to the applicant or their advisers to comment on.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Yes, which is again my previous experiences there's an exchange of
documents so that the applicant sees everything that you have.
MR KARAS:
Yes.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And I was just really going to ask that question: does the applicant see
every document that is in your possession to assist you in making your
decision?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
It may not see every document but it would be made aware of the substance
of the documents in your possession. Say for example you might be referring
to some country information about a particular group of people, if the
information is about the applicant themselves, so if the information is
what comes under 424A, that section of the Act, you would need to make
the substance, I mean, that's what the law requires us to do, to make
the substance of that known and the implications of that so not only are
you relating the substance but also you need to point to the implications
that that material will have in their case.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So it's a judgment of the Tribunal member what in fact is conveyed to
the applicant?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Yes, but not to do so, not to actually provide the substance, how the
implications that it will have for this particular case would be an error
of law so it is very important.
MS LESNIE: How
do you do that when someone is in Port Hedland or Curtin?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
You have to do it in writing, that's what the Act requires you to
do it so you would send that to them and to their advisers.
MS LESNIE:
Are they translated into the language? No. So they all receive them in
English?
MRS SULLIVAN:
So in terms of the implications the person would need to be able to read
English in order to determine what the implications are?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Well, they all have an adviser.
MR KARAS:
And they would have access to translated material and if they are at a
hearing and they require an interpreter the interpreter will be there
and available in the language which they have nominated and during the
hearing it may be that the member will refer to the information and say
that, look, the information before me, independent information, indicates
A, B, C, whereas you said it X, Y, Z, do you have any comment in relation
to that, and that is interpreted back to them so they do understand it.
MRS SULLIVAN:
I also am not aware of the filing system of the Department, but is there
one file, a series of files, what magnitude are we looking at here?
MR KARAS:
Well, the folders are sort of manila folders and however much they can
take and if there's more information obviously there would be a second
and third.
MRS SULLIVAN:
And they're located in different places?
MR KARAS:
I don't know exactly. I would think with the Department, well they're
located somewhere and they are made available to the Tribunal as soon
as an application for review is made.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Assuming there's a file at the detention centre there may well be
a file in central office and there well may be a file at state office,
just for one
MR KARAS:
I'm not sure about that.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
No, I would assume you need to ask them but I mean my impression is
that there is a single file which is the, we see a file.
MR KARAS:
We see a file.
DR OZDOWSKI:
A composite file.
MR KARAS:
No, the file and it will have on the front, sort of notations and initialling
and dates where it's gone from me to you, and you to, you know, Dr Thomas,
and she's given it to, you know, it goes around and it's all notated and
we get that file.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
And it's cross-referenced to anything else that there may be there.
On occasions a compliance file may exist or for example if a person who
has made a prior application comes to Australia and the country of origin,
there might be some notation that allows you to see that a previous application
was made in Jordan at some date at which you can request that file.
MR KARAS:
You can request that file and that material as well.
MRS SULLIVAN:
So do you have a check list as it were on documents that you would expect
to see on that file, and does someone in your office check those off and
say, well document number 32 is missing from this file?
MR KARAS: No,
not in that way. You would expect of course to be an application, documents
supporting the application, submissions from the adviser, statements that
the individuals may have made, if the department has sought information
elsewhere like for argument sake a language analysis or something of that
sort but those records would be on the file, yes.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Very importantly what you still have is a record of the decision that
was made and that decision contains the list of all the materials that
were relied on so I mean, you would have that and you would go back to
that decision and have a look so that would highlight any deficiencies
if there were any and it isn't, it is not my experience that that is an
issue.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Thank you. And my final question relates to an issue that we've had drawn
to our attention in a number of locations and that's the variation date
of birth in a number of documents. My question really is, have you come
across this issue and how do you deal with it because it's of particular
relevance to unaccompanied minors?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
From time to time I mean it really depends, I mean, we certainly get
files that have got all dates in the Iranian calendar for example; another
one, applications that have all, have dates in the Christian calendar,
I mean normally you go and have a look and if there was a question about
a particular date you would seek to understand where the mistake came
from, if any, and you would make some allowance for that if it fitted
in, I mean, with the case if necessary.
MR KARAS:
On occasions you do get official documents that have different dates -
when I say official documents one may be from a church or religious authority
saying a person was born on such-and-such a day, named, baptised or whatever
on that day. Now you get another document which may have a date different
either in the year or the month or so, the Tribunal will make such inquiries
as it can in relation to it and then it just has to make a decision.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
In a lot of Iraqi cases they have the same date of birth, 1st of August
for all people. There was a particular period of time I think because
of the issues to do with the bureaucracy there so you would be relying
on the year.
PROF THOMAS:
When you got to the hearings for family so you would consider they're
all in one? So if, say one parent qualifies as a refugee the whole family
will receive visas then as refugees?
MR KARAS:
If one of the parents did and they were all on the application normally
the finding that one person is, sorry, one of the parents is owed a protection
obligation from Australia means that the rest do.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
But it is up to the Department, so the Tribunal has to make a finding
in relation to all of the applicants. So you have a number of possible
outcomes that one applicant is a refugee and the other ones for example,
there are no claims on which to make a decision. You may have two applicants
make claims and both applicants have been found refugees so two applicants
have made claims and only one person has been found to be a refugee, but
the other persons have been found to be members of the same family. You
may have all the possible combinations of that but then it is up to the
Department in the regulations as to what visas accrue as in the case of
a family unit.
PROF THOMAS:
So, would there be a case when you left say the father with a refugee
visa and reject the rest, children?
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
The Tribunal may be satisfied of the claims of the person but that
doesn't mean to say that they are not going to get visas. For example,
you could have a family made up of two adults, both parties have made
claims, the Tribunal is satisfied of the claims of one but is not satisfied
of the claim of the other party, that is possible.
PROF THOMAS:
Because very often you see a case of family, often the father alone is
a political activist.
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
Sorry?
PROF THOMAS:
That's why when children passive
MS CRISTOFFANINI:
That's right, in that case your decision would be that no claims were
made on behalf of the applicant wife and the applicant children and the
Tribunal is in no position to make, to be satisfied as to their need for
protection. But the decision as to the visa for the family would be that
takes into account the family relationship.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you, Ms Christoffanini, thank you also, for presenting this evidence
and we may follow it up with some further questions in writing. Thank
you.
MR KARAS:
In relation to your question on the Mandaeans, do you just want us to
make that information available to your secretariat?
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes, to the secretariat to the Inquiry. Thank you very much.
Now, I would like
Father Frank Brennan to come forward. Again, Father Brennan, thank you
very much for your submission. I would like to ask you to take an oath.
FATHER FRANK TENISON
BRENNAN, sworn [2.53am]
JESUIT PRIEST AND LAWYER, JESUIT REFUGEE SERVICE AND UNIYA, THE JESUIT
SOCIAL JUSTICE CENTRE
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could I ask you to state for the record your name and qualifications,
address and the capacity in which you are appearing here?
FATHER BRENNAN:
My name is Frank Tennyson Brennan, I am a Jesuit priest and lawyer and
I am appearing for the Jesuit Refugee Service and UNIYA, the Jesuit Social
Justice Centre.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I made a number of orders to protect the privacy of people, so I would
like to ask you in your evidence you are not mentioning the names of refugees
or third parties which are involved with the process of the refugee.
FATHER BRENNAN:
Of course.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I ask you maybe to start with an opening statement.
FATHER BRENNAN:
Yes and it may be of assistance if I provide to the Commission three
copies of the comprehensive correspondence between myself and the government
in relation to the chief matter that I wish to raise.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes, we are taking this into evidence, thank you.
FATHER BRENNAN:
Since I returned to Australia in January, I've been attending Woomera
about every five or six weeks and have had the opportunity to meet with
detainees there and I've also been extended the courtesy of ready access
to the Minister and his office and there have been, as you will see, extensive
communications.
At the outset I would
want to state that I have found the DIMIA officers at Woomera unfailingly
co-operative and helpful but as the correspondence highlights, I think
there are significant problems institutionally in terms of DIMIA in its
operations in Canberra, particularly for the protection of children. If
I might just make some overview remarks before coming to the particular
case study which I think highlights my concerns.
Just following upon
what has been observed by the Refugee Review Tribunal it would be appreciated
by members that a very large percentage of those in detention are people
from Afghanistan and Iraq and, of course, anyone in detention will lodge
an appeal if they lose at the first instance. Therefore, there is a mentality
in place like Woomera, particularly amongst the Afghans and Iraqis that
the Australian process is something of a lottery because the determination
and set aside rate between the primary decision-making phase and the Refugee
Review Tribunal phase is not at all credible.
The further observation
to make is that if you go for example, to the statistics the Minister
quoted to parliament most recently on 26 June when now almost half of
those in detention, as he says, are persons who have been through all
processes, been rejected and are simply waiting to go back home. The significant
problem, particularly for Iraqis and Palistinians is they can't go back
home and there is, of course, as Commissioners would be aware, very good
legal arguments to say that the detention itself is unlawful as being
unconstitutional in accordance with the provisions of Lim's case, no doubt
that will be tested in the near future.
But when you have
a situation of detention of children and families where there is no prospect
of the issue of a visa and there is no prospect of people going home,
you are dealing with a far more traumatic situation than simply waiting
in detention for a visa. Set against that background I would like now
to come in my opening statement to deal with a particular case which I
think highlights some of the endemic problems that do exist.
So, I want to present
a case study in the assault of a 7 year-old child at Woomera with baton
and tear gas, the failure of all authorities to investigate adequately,
zealotry and dilatory behaviour of DIMIA concerned more with media management
and spin doctoring rather than care of children in detention and the institution
of the system to honour the dignity of a mother and child in detention.
So, I state categorically that in my opinion amounts to institutionalised
child abuse.
You'll see in what
I have set out before with the chronology of the events that occurred
on Good Friday night and into Holy Saturday morning. I happened to be
in Woomera that day in my capacity as a priest conducting a church service,
so I was rather happy I must say, that I was trapped there in detention
for some hours and was able to witness at first hand some of the events
that occurred.
I then returned on
the following Tuesday and learnt various things, including being told
by various people, including persons in authority, that unfortunately
had been hit by tear gas during that melee in Woomera. I then met with
a young woman, a single mother about whom I'll speak more later, who came
to me with her young child who was aged 7 and I was shown the bruises
to the child on the left leg and the lower right ankle which were quite
consistent with the mother and child's account, mainly that the child
had been hit with a baton.
As you'll be aware
and I'll table it with you, there was then, well, I then wrote at length
to the Minister the next day, who wouldn't, an Australian citizen observing
this sort of behaviour in contemporary Australia. The next day a medical
report was made at the ACM Medical Centre which notes, as I put in my
report to you:
Bruise of a few
days during duration on the medial aspect of the left knee and abrasion
and small bruise on the right shin.
Some days then passed,
in fact two weeks and it was only some days later that DIMIA had posted
on its web site after I'd made my first public comment about this issue
a couple of weeks after having provided the minister with all the relevant
information where DIMIA on its web site stated that:
Contrary to Father
Brennan's claims, the Department had no report of injuries to a 7 year-old
child.
And consistent with
DIMIA's approach on these matters, made much of the fact that there had
been injuries to 17 ACM officers. It then went on, I think fairly gratuitously,
to state:
If Father Brennan
has information or evidence of mis-treatment of detainees he should report
it to the appropriate authorities for investigation.
Under the Westminster
system one would have thought that the Minister was the appropriate authority.
I then sought correction of the government web site on 22 April, as you'll
see from the correspondence, particularly item 6, it took three days for
that matter then to be withdrawn from the web site. Unfortunately DIMIA
didn't withdraw the letter from publication of the Canberra Times, so
there was then a public exchange of letters between us in the Canberra
Times.
After my response
on 29 April, then for the first time, there was a pro-active response
by the Minister's Office, the Minister's Chief-of-Staff, as you see from
item 7 of the correspondence or point 10 in my chronology wrote saying
that the DIMIA officer was correct in asserting that:
There were no reported
injuries of detainee children at Woomera, you assert differently.
So, you will note
that there was something of a semantic discussion going on as to whether
or not there were injuries rather than reports of injuries though, of
course, it should be noted at this stage, back on 3 April, the ACM medical
officer had presumably already lodged the relevant documents. Then later
on that day, in fact at 9 pm, obviously there had been some further researches
going on after discussions between myself and the Minister's Office.
I was informed, as
you see there in point 11, that there was indeed a record of injuries
to a 11 year-old child. I didn't profess any expertise in being able to
identify whether the child was 7 or 11, the mother had told me he was
7 and he looked 7 to me and then, as you see, next day there was confirmation
that there were medical records which in fact related to a 7 year-old
child. Then having received the request to provide the name of the child
and the parent, I did that after getting the relevant permission from
the mother to provide that information.
I then saw it as
necessary to lodge a letter of complaint with Mr Farmer, the Secretary
of DIMIA on 6 May and it should be noted that though it only took 6 hours
for DIMIA in Canberra to post a public letter of response to me, namely,
that:
There was no information
or evidence available and if Father Brennan had relevant information,
he should provide it to the appropriate authorities.
Here we are 60 days
later and it's still not been possible to deal with that complaint. There
was a personal apology given me by the Minister for which I'm very grateful,
at our meeting on 3 June. I then went to Woomera last Wednesday and was
very troubled when I then met again with the mother of the child and we
spoke at some length and I told her about this Inquiry which was being
conducted and she was anxious that she would be able to make a statement
and so what I have with me is a letter which she has signed and the medical
report from ACM dated 3 April and also the calling card of the South Australian
police and I will duly table those but, if I may, I would simply like
to quote the relevant extracts of the letter at the moment:
My son was with
me in Oscar Compound during the disturbance in the early hours of Saturday,
30 March. He and I were both hit by tear gas even though we were not trying
to escape. I was blinded for about a minute and I took my son to my chest
and embraced him to protect me. I started to move away from the scene
with my son. Then an ACM guard came and bowed over me and struck my son
with a baton. On Tuesday, 2 April, I told my story to Fr Frank Brennan
and the lawyers at Woomera. I then went to the doctor on Wednesday, 3
April. The doctor made a report which I attach to this letter. I asked
the lawyers to make a complaint.
You will have also
noted that the Minister's Chief of Staff indicated in her correspondence
that a complaint was duly being lodged with the state authorities.
One and a half months
later two policemen came to see me. I told them what happened to my son.
They said they would return with an interpreter from Adelaide and with
Federal Police and someone from Childrens Services and with a camera for
interview with my son.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Two Federal policemen?
FR BRENNAN:
No, well, as I understood her, it was that they were two State policemen
and that they would be returning later with Federal police with Children's
Services. You'll note that she sometimes uses different terms for these
state authorities, but that's not surprising, she's in Woomera and English
of course is not her first language.
- and with a camera
for interview with my son. Then about one week later and before the United
Nations came to visit Woomera I was interviewed by a named policeman of
the South Australian Police about the incident. He said he was the boss
of the other police that would come. He said it was not the responsibility
of Federal Police because they would come only for damaged property. He
said Child Service would not come because their responsibility is child
abuse and relationships between children and parents. He gave me a card
with a reference number on it. He recorded our conversation.
He was interested
only in the events which occurred on the evening of Friday, 29 March.
He told me that the doctor and ACM had not made any report of my son's
injury to Children's Services. I asked him about my rights. He told me
you can't do anything because you are captive in here and when you get
out and get your visa you can continue your protest and maybe you can
get your rights. He asked whether I saw who hit my son. I said I did not
see because the guard was wearing a mask.
You'll appreciate
that night that all of the guards were wearing head to toe American style
riot gear.
He said we can't
catch him because you didn't see him. I said it's not important who hit
my son, just it's important that ACM action that they hit children because
it's their habit in our compound.
She then explains
that she was not available at Woomera when the UN or when HREOC came.
She said:
I trusted the government
to protect my son. I hope my complaint can help other mothers and children.
I'm only a single mother in detention who wants the government to care
for us.
So I table her letter
and the medical report and also the calling card from the South Australian
Police. The only response which I have received from government on this
is of course the Minister's letter to me of 3 June. It is a letter which
was undated but which was handed to me by the Minister at our most recent
meeting on 3 June and you'll note that the Minister at no stage in the
letter refers to this particular case but does make much of the fact that
there is a memorandum of understanding between state authorities and federal
authorities on these matters.
My observations by
way of concluding this opening statement would be that though it took
DIMIA less than six hours to publish a false refutation of the claims
of assault which had been formally communicated in writing to the Minister
two weeks before. After 60 days the Department has still not communicated
the results of its inquiry into the alleged breach of the APS Code of
Conduct by its Director of Public Affairs. The MOU with the state government
and the permanent working party of senior departmental officers have not
affected a satisfactory investigation of this instance of institutionalised
child abuse.
Given the change
to the case load at Woomera with most now being rejectees with nothing
to gain and nothing to lose and the despair inculcated in this remnant
group of detainees now less than 200, and you must appreciate of course
that Woomera is now a very different place from having had something like
1500 people there, many of whom now have been released on visas, now with
a remnant of a population many of whom are particularly the Iraqis and
Palestinians, are people who have been rejected and, for example, the
Palestinians now who have written letters four months in a row to the
Minister saying please get us out of Australia.
So you have to understand
how angry and upset they get in that detention when they hear public statements
by government saying these people are not refugees and they can go home
whenever they like. These Palestinians by way of aside would dearly love
to rejoin their wives and children on the Gaza Strip but they're not allowed
or able to do so and are simply held in detention without any form of
judicial review. So it does seem that in this sort of instance it's even
more necessary that the Department ensure adequate investigation of complaints
such as the administration of baton and tear gas to a seven year old child
and I would have thought that an apology be offered by the Department
and ACM for the needless, witting or unwitting, assault, obfuscation and
cover-up which have ensued.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much.
MS LESNIE:
Could I ask have you drawn this case to our attention because it's an
unusual situation or do you see it as an example of other things that
are going on in Woomera?
FR BRENNAN:
No. I mean I'm not saying that this is part of an ongoing pattern of behaviour.
I mean I've already attested to, I think, the good offices of the DIMIA
people at Woomera and I think many of the ACM people who work at Woomera
are very dedicated, particularly to this remnant population. As you'd
understand there's a certain bonding which has grown up between these
people who are now a remnant group and the staff who are there. Now all
of us who go there hear of course anecdotal evidence about abuses that
occur and whether or not there has been a ready investigation of those
matters. I'm not apprised of evidence about those matters. This is a particular
case which came to my attention which I have seen through fairly scrupulously
and I think the paper trail highlights what is a systematic problem of
fairly overwhelming proportions.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes, that's exactly what I wanted to ask you, how would you characterise
the systematic conclusions of that particular case and in the light of
your experience of six weekly visits over time?
FR BRENNAN:
Well, I think I can best explain that by my state of mind when I met with
the mother last Wednesday. I'd actually been overseas for the best part
of two months so there'd been some gap between my visits to Woomera on
this occasion. I had fully expected given as you in the Commission would
be aware DIMIA out of Canberra is fairly thorough in its dealing with
public relations on these sorts of issues that where a citizen, myself,
has come forward and said I have seen the bruises on the child and there
is a medical report by ACM which is consistent with it and there have
been reports by people in authority that sadly the wind was blowing the
wrong way on Good Friday night and yes it's very regrettable the children
were hit by tear gas. The thought that that sort of incident would have
occurred you would think that institutionally there would be a commitment
to investigate thoroughly to have the matter rectified and to make it
very clear that it was an isolated incident. Whereas I think if I may
say what we've seen is simply an elaborate exercise in spin doctoring.
DR OZDOWSKI: I
visited Woomera twice. I visited Woomera about a year ago and last time
about two weeks ago and I must say in comparison with what I saw last
year now the situation it's much more depressing, at least that's my judgment.
Would it coincide with your judgment that the situation was worse there?
FR BRENNAN:
Yes, and it must be self evidently so, sir, in that as I said before there
is a world of difference between a family being in detention in a place
like Woomera where they have an expectation or a hope that the day will
come where they're given a visa or where the overwhelming percentage of
the population there are in that situation, but now that is not the situation
with the overwhelming percentage of those who are now a remnant of a major
group who came and they know with no more boats coming basically they
are the left over of a policy which was instituted basically to be that
which is punitive and deterrent but where it is said that it is not that.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Going back to January this year there were also some riots and quite a
amount of lip sewing happening, were you visiting?
FR BRENNAN: Yes
I was. At that time you will recall there had been a significant delay
in the processing of Afghan claims and the minister, to give him credit,
at that time made it clear that there would be a prompt renewal of the
processing of Afghan claims and many of the people then were granted their
visas within that foreseeable future.
DR OZDOWSKI: There
were also allegations made partly, well there was also controversy which
was saying that the parents were assisting children to sew their lips.
Do you know of any evidence that the parents either assisted or encouraged
children in the lip sewing exercise?
FR BRENNAN:
No. The only thing I was ever told or ever heard was very insistent remarks
by parents and by what they call the delegates, that is, those who would
be representing the various ethnic groups in their dealings with ACM and
with DIMIA insisting that at no stage did parents either counsel or advise
or recommend or urge children to do so but that, rather, children of their
own accord wanted in solidarity to act with their parents.
DR OZDOWSKI: Coming
to Easter riots where you were a participant, could you describe what
happened and especially say how children were involved or unwilling with
participating in it and children, I mean up to 18 years old?
FR BRENNAN:
Yes, well, I emerged from the church service which was being held in a
donga, probably only about 30 or 40 feet from where the fence was then
being broken down. We were then ushered out to a space where those who
had attended the church were Christians and Sabean Mandaeans. There were
some of the Sabean Mandaeans then who were not able to return to their
compound and waited in dread and fear while ACM - see what you have in
these sorts of situations are if you like the goodies and the baddies
where you have, of course, the ACM riot gear in place but also you have
those who are ACM staff who are there to try and settle particularly mothers
and children.
Now, there were attempts
being made to return some of these people to their compound but that was
not possible because there was one man, who I understand to have been
a Sabean Mandaean, was very upset that these other Sabean Mandaeans had
actually joined the Christians on Good Friday and he truly was going berserk
and he was a man known to have a very violent disposition. I was then
sitting with a number of children as the water tank, the spray cannot
water truck, was backed up ready to deal with this man and then about
six of these men in riot gear went in to deal with him.
While that went on
there were two men bare chested who went to the top of a nearby donga,
stripped off above the waist and with razor blades were threatening to
do further injury to themselves. Now the trauma being caused to children
watching that sort of thing, all I can say is, it was traumatic enough
for me. I suspect that for some of the children it might not have been
quite as traumatic because they'd been exposed to so much of it. There
were then some children who started to play up and the ACM officers were
saying that basically they should stay there and not try and return to
any other compound.
I saw one child put
on a tantrum and start to attack - a very small child - started to attack
an ACM officer saying to the mother, the only way you get a visa is by
putting on that sort of performance. So it's a very unreal sort of world
and yes, that was the sort of window of opportunity that I had to see
something of the sort of mindset which at play.
DR OZDOWSKI: Did
you see women being restrained in a particular fashion?
FR BRENNAN:
No, because we'd been taken out of the compound where the breakout was
occurring and it was not possible to see actually there at that time.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did you see any action by officials to remove children from the area which
was threatened?
FR BRENNAN:
No, but I was unable to see that area, as I said. What you have to understand
about Woomera, of course, is that it is discrete compounds which are not
only isolated from each other but the visual capacity to see into the
compounds is very slight.
DR OZDOWSKI:
In your opinion, considering all your visits, is that system fixable?
FR BRENNAN:
No, well, everyone knows that Woomera is, I mean, it's a psychological
hell hole. There is now the new facility that's been opened. The so-called
IDAG, sometimes called the Independent Detention Advisory Group, the Immigration
Detention Advisory Group, has as I have understood, recommended since
January that Woomera be closed and every right thinking person who has
been to Woomera I think is of that view, myself included, but the minister
at this stage has not seen fit to indicate the appropriateness of the
closure of Woomera.
DR OZDOWSKI:
What I ask wasn't Woomera specifically but about the mandatory detention
system which was put in place in this country, whether it's fixable.
FR BRENNAN:
No, I don't think it's fixable. As the Minister well knows, I'm one of
those Australians who is implacably opposed to a detention principle but
given that it presently enjoys broad bipartisan support in our Parliament
I think that those of us who are the minority are well entitled, and that's
why I welcome an Inquiry of this sort, to say as I have said to the Minister,
we may well have a system of detention that everyone would agree that
it should be transparent, fair, it should not be capricious and it should
as far as possible respect the human rights and dignity of persons. I
think even those who support a detention policy, there are many of those
Australians who would be appalled at the thought that in 2002 a seven
year old kid can be hit by tear gas and baton and there can then be a
comprehensive cover up by Canberra.
DR OZDOWSKI:
The last question before I will ask my Assistant Commissioners to ask
you questions. Basically, what in your view is the reason for such a lengthy
detention? When I came to my job I think the average was about eight months;
that went down to about three and a half months, then it bubbled again
to eight, ten months, now possibly it's God knows how long. What are the
reasons for this?
FR BRENNAN: Well,
I think you have to look at it at each discrete phase. There have obviously
been delays in terms of processing primary decision making, particularly
with Afghans and that was understandable as we heard from RRT people there
before. Then the next phase from primary decision making phase to RRT
I would have thought that the very isolation of these places must be a
reason which has contributed to a further delay if these people were being
held in detention facilities such as Villawood or whatever, where there
would be far more access by RRT members.
I would have thought
that could be done more quickly and then, given the lottery nature of
that initial process particularly for Afghans and Iraqis, then of course
the desperate desire to try anything including Federal Court remedies
is there and what we now see, of course, is the delay is not because people
are waiting for anything to happen in terms of migration processes, it's
simply that in order to maintain a universal detention system the government
has to continue to play the bluff with the Australian public that those
who have been rejected, for example the Iraqis and Palestinians are being
held in detention for a legitimate migration purpose.
They are not being
held there for anything of the sort. They know their identity, they know
they are not a security risk, they know they are not a health risk, they
know where to find them, particularly if they've got little kids, they
could be released into the community tomorrow until it is safe for them
to return to Iraq or Palestine. Now, for the moment of course it is unthinkable
that we would return people to Iraq when we have a Government that says
that it will be party to any future war.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Could you let me know, do you know of any data indicating the risk of
absconding - of families seeking asylum in other developed democracies?
FR BRENNAN:
No, I don't, I'm sorry.
DR OZDOWSKI: You
don't know off-hand? Thank you. Professor Thomas?
PROF THOMAS: So,
with all of your knowledge do you have any suggestion for an alternative
solution to detention centres?
FR BRENNAN:
Yes - close them. But, given that that will not be happening, what is
essential is that, for example, if there be a credible complaint made
to the Minister for Immigration that a seven year old child has been hit
with tear-gas and a baton. Rather than have departmental officials engage
in some media campaign to try and discredit the credibility of the Australian
citizen who happened to have the misfortune of seeing the child, why not
get on with ensuring that there is a full and credible investigation.
And ensuring that something, even in writing, is given to the mother of
the child so as to be assured that, you may be being held in detention
but you are not completely deprived of your human rights in this sort
of situation.
PROF THOMAS:
Thank you.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Mrs Sullivan?
MRS SULLIVAN:
You said a couple of times that "that won't happen". That there
won't be in fact a major sea-change in the approach that is taken. Is
there any way to break the impasse that you can see? Given that it has
been created.
FR BRENNAN: Well,
I think we are now moving beyond the purpose of our Inquiry today. But
it does seem to me that, yes, the obligation which is cast upon citizens
such as myself who disagree with the policy - which basically enjoys bi-partisan
support in our Parliament - is that we have to come up with something
which is seen to be more workable and more decent.
Now, the problem
is that the mind-set which has developed in Australia is because, ironically,
it is such a small problem. Namely, 1 to 4000 people a year turning up
by boat because we are an island continent - that it is such a small nut
that we can design a sledge-hammer to crack it.
We are not in the
situation that you would be in Europe of having tens of thousands of asylum
seekers. Where, of course, it would be unthinkable to be putting so many
children in detention. And of course in third-world countries it is absolutely
inconceivable that precious resources would be spent on putting children
in detention. And so what we are left with is I think the unique Australian
situation where we pride ourselves that we've designed a system which
works because now no-one else is coming, but we are left with this remnant
and we continue to pride ourselves that it's decent. I defy anyone to
go to a place like Woomera and to meet these mothers and children in these
situations and think it is decent.
MRS SULLIVAN:
Thank you.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Just one last question. We spoke, not that long ago, to all parents and
children in Woomera and also in other detention centres. We didn't speak
to the mother of the seven year old child which was bashed over there.
Could you perhaps let me know, did the mother mention why she couldn't
see us, or what has happened?
FR BRENNAN:
Yes, she was in hospital.
DR OZDOWSKI: She
was in hospital on that day. Well, Father Brennan, thank you very much.
FR BRENNAN: In
hospital suffering as the result it might be said of the trauma which
in part had resulted from this incident.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Well, Father Brennan, thank you very much for your submission and thank
you for your appearance. I would like to ask Dr Eileen Pittaway to come
forward. Yes, welcome to the hearings. I would like to ask you to take
an oath or affirmation.
EILEEN PITTAWAY,
affirmed [3.26]
DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRE FOR REFUGEE RESEARCH, UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
and BOARD MEMBER OF THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON REFUGEE WOMEN
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you. Could I ask you to state your name, address, qualifications
and the capacity in which you are appearing at the hearing?
DR PITTAWAY: My
name is Eileen Pittaway. I reside in [address removed]. My qualification
is PhD in Social Policy Refugee Studies. I am the Director of the Centre
for Refugee Research at the University of New South Wales and Board Member
of the Australian National Committee on Refugee Women, and those two bodies
have jointly submitted to this Inquiry.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you very much. Just to remind you that I made a number of orders
in respect of privacy of individuals. In particular I would like to ask
you not to identify asylum seekers either by name or in any other way.
Similarly, please do not identify third parties and that includes employees
of ACM and DIMIA. Now, could I ask you to make an opening statement and
in particular I would like to ask you to say a few words about the nature
of your experience with children in detention or children who left detention
centres? And I would like you to tell the Inquiry how much direct knowledge
do you have of the situation.
DR PITTAWAY:
Thank you. The submission that we have made is based on the work that
both ANCORW and the Centre for Refugee Research has done with children
who have been in detention but we have not worked directly in detention
centres. So, our experience is with children who have been in detention
and are now in the community.
Most of our work
is research work, we are a research centre. We became particularly concerned
when we were doing research into the mental health sequela for children
- refugee children who had suffered from torture and trauma. Or, worse,
members of families who had suffered severe torture and trauma prior to
resettlement in Australia. This was done at the request of the mothers
of the children. We'd been working for a long while with mothers when
they asked, in particular, could we focus on the children who were experiencing
a lot of problems in the community.
We decided that we
would look at the experience of children through the people who have the
prime contact with them. Mainly school-teachers, school counsellors, local
community centre workers and doctors. In doing that research which was
in refugee children in general, one of the unexpected findings of the
research was th comment made by just about every professional we spoke
to, that it was their opinion that the children who had been in detention
were having many more problems in resettlement in Australia than other
refugee children who came direct.
So, I think what
we are doing is trying to respond to points (4) and (6) in the terms of
reference of the Inquiry. The impact of detention on the well-being and
healthy development of children, and additional methods and safeguards
which may be required to protect the rights and best interests of child
asylum seekers and refugees residing in the community after a period of
detention. The research we did certainly did suggest that the children
who had been in detention had grave problems in resettlement and there
was a time lag in this.
I must say at this
stage that we were not funded to do this research and have so far failed
to raise the funding to do the research we think must be done into this
area. It was one of those circumstances where in interviewing some hundred
professionals working with refugee children some 70 per cent of them made
comments about the children who they knew had been in detention. So it
became, as often in research, one of those secondary findings that was
unexpected. We also work extensively with refugee women, refugee families
through the networks of the Australian National Committee on Refugee Women.
I'll just give two
examples, perhaps, about the sorts of things that we are concerned about.
General reports back from teachers and school counsellors is that refugee
children who have been in detention much more tend to be exemplary students
for the first year after release from detention. At that stage it is sort
of supports the notion of resilience. The refugee children - you know
children are like rubber-balls - they bounce back whatever we dish out
to them and they'll be all right. But after about a year and often on
an inverse ratio to the settlement of the parent the children in detention
started exhibiting quite severe behaviours - dysfunctional behaviours.
It was also noted that when they started to play the play was often play
modelling violence, modelling conflict and that they found it very difficult
to make relationships with other children in the playground. This is of
course of great concern to us.
One of the other
findings from that research which alerted us to the problems was that
while we as researchers could identify a list of sequela of this. We could
identify a list of indicators, benchmarks. We could write books for teachers
and counsellors which we did saying, if you see these behaviours these
are the sorts of things you might need to do. You need to refer the children
on. When it came to making listings of the places where we could refer
the children for assistance in the community there was virtually nothing.
The services that are available are excellent but are so over-stretched
that the children are not able to access them. And I think this is a violation
of their basic human rights.
A classic example
is one family we had who had been in detention - it was a woman with five
daughters. They had watched - been forced to watch at gun-point in their
country of origin the father and brother shot. They had all been raped,
including the seven and eight year and 18 months later we still couldn't
get them any counselling assistance and the whole family was suffering
from the affects of their experience. Plus the experience of having been
in detention in Australia prior to being released into the community,
it doesn't take an Einstein I think to realise the long term effects that
it is going to have on children. We are currently working with a family
with three children, one of the girls is 17, they are out of detention,
they were in Woomera for nearly two years. On the way over, their journey
was horrendous, they escaped from Afghanistan, they lived in a hell camp
in Pakistan, both of the teenage girls were raped in the camp.
They escaped using
a people smuggler and in great danger, they landed in Indonesia. They
came over in a leaky boat, the mother who was five months pregnant had
a miscarriage on the boat and the children had to help her dispose of
the foetus overboard. They came to Australia and were put into detention
and they tell us how all the time the children said to the father, father
why are you doing this to us, why are you making us come, why are you
bringing us to this camp, why are you putting us on this boat and the
whole time the father said because Australia is a good country, Australia
is the country where we will be cared for, Australia is the country of
human rights.
They were put in
Woomera where they - again we know what the sorts of experiences happened,
they were forced to see suicide attempts, they were in riots. The mother
has not spoken since she's been in Australia. They have not been out of
detention for a year and have been informed by an official, and I don't
know who the official is, that they are having to prepare to go back to
Afghanistan.
The girl who is the
main spokesperson for the family who is 17 and is doing extremely well
considering everything, at school and wants to continue, has been told
by her father, if they are going to force us to go back then you have
to leave school with your brothers and sisters and work because we've
got no money, everything is destroyed when we go back you'll need work.
The mother has not
only not spoken since she lost the child but has apparently not stopped
crying since they've been told they've got to go back, so that 17 year
old girl is carrying the family and trying to study and we do not have
services in the community to help those people. The services we have are
so overstretched and so inadequate that I think the whole range of human
rights have been violated for those families and many other like them.
MR OZDOWSKI:
There are two issues I would like to ask you and then I will ask Professor
Thomas to ask questions about mental health. Your submission stated that
when you sought information from employees and asylum seekers, they were
unwilling to be identified. Could you tell me what was the reason why
they were not willing to be identified?
MS PITTAWAY:
They said that they thought that they would be deported immediately.
MR OZDOWSKI:
So they were fearing the Department of Immigration punishing them for
going public on the issues?
MS PITTAWAY:
Yes. There is in particular one case where the mother informed us that
her three teenage sons had been padlocked to a bed, in two beds in solitary
confinement for giving cheek to guards in detention. She had
MR OZDOWSKI: I
don't understand, could you
MS PITTAWAY:
The guards in the detention centre
MR OZDOWSKI:
It happened in the detention centre?
MS PITTAWAY:
Yes - had claimed that the boys had been very cheeky to them and therefore
they handcuffed them to beds.
MR OZDOWSKI:
For three days?
MS PITTAWAY:
For three days.
MR OZDOWSKI: In
which detention centre did it happen?
MS PITTAWAY:
In Woomera.
MR OZDOWSKI:
In Woomera.
MS PITTAWAY:
Now we tried - we asked, we told them the only way we could do anything
about this was to get her to make a statement. It wasn't just our organisation,
there are a number of people who know about this case, she absolutely
refused, she said no, I am out now, I am at least safe in the community
for a while, if I say anything against the department, it was her belief
that she would be deported and be punished.
We have other cases
who have said the same, I guess as research is one of our biggest frustrations
is trying to verify massive anecdotal evidence. We have people who have
come out of detention and the fact that we are not allowed in. It is so
difficult to get permission to do proper research in detention so we have
all of this evidence that we cannot verify in any way that would satisfy
either the academic or the bureaucratic community that what we are saying
is valid.
MR OZDOWSKI: The
second question I've got is that DIMIA submission claims that Woomera
alternative detention project is a success. You disagree with this?
MS PITTAWAY:
Absolutely.
MR OZDOWSKI: Could
you give us the reasons why?
MS PITTAWAY: I
think that it was supposed to be based on the Swedish model and whereby
the women and children were released into the community, welcoming community
in an urban centre with their own community nearby, whereas the women
and children at Woomera were released into what some have described as
a hostile environment. The conditions were perhaps better than the detention
centre but in other ways very restrictive and a lot of the local people
were also hostile being detained.
MR OZDOWSKI:
How do you know about it?
MS PITTAWAY: Again
it is anecdotal evidence from people who have come through from there
and who have worked there in the community.
MR OZDOWSKI:
Thank you. Professor Thomas?
PROF THOMAS:
You talk about people that in your case, like the family with the two
girls who have no help, have you contacted the service of treatment and
rehabilitation of torture and trauma survivors?
MS PITTAWAY:
Yes. They are an excellent service but they are overworked.
PROF THOMAS:
It looked like the case that you just mentioned - that it the very kind
of case that should have priority.
MS PITTAWAY:
Yes but one of the problems there is that as new waves of people arrive,
we don't have enough interpreters available for the services to be given.
So it is not just a case of providing the medical service, it is a case
of also ensuring that we have the trained interpreters ready at any given
time to be able to interpret at the level needed to do the sort of counselling
that would have been necessary for those families. They are the sorts
of resource issues that get in the way the whole time.
PROF THOMAS:
In your submission you talk about the principle that the children had
inbuilt resilience so what is your view about that now?
MS PITTAWAY:
I think that children are resilient if they are given the proper supports
so to say children are not resilient would be to say that once they'd
been through these experiences they would never recover. I think research
dating right back to the time of the Holocaust, indicates that if children
are given the proper supports in the community and if their parents were
given the proper supports because so often the traumatised children have
traumatised parents, so that the normal supports for a child who has problems
are not there.
If their supports
are built in, intensively, and it seems to be not. Long term research
indicates that if it is intensively done, for instances in the first year
of need then resilience comes into play and in particular children recover.
If that support is not there then the children's resilience is not, it
doesn't do anything for them.
PROF THOMAS:
So what would be your hypothesis about the long term effect on these children
who have just been released now from detention centres?
MS PITTAWAY:
It is my hypothesis that if we don't acknowledge first of all prior to
arrival in Australia, the majority of them live through certainly traumatic
experiences, many of them witness torture and many of the older children
were raped or sexually abused, I think we have to acknowledge those facts
and that the detention experience exacerbates that trauma, adds to it,
often just by being there adds to that trauma but children who have been
through horrendous experiences need supportive families and the very structure
of detention takes away family support possibilities, parents are not
allowed to parent naturally or normally in detention.
So you are taking
away all of the structures that would at normal times keep families together.
We are talking about the children who have been traumatised. If those
children come out into the community where they are going to meet racism,
problems at school because of language, and still the same problems of
trauma, if those issues are not addressed, I think those children have
a very poor chance of growing and resettling or staying whole enough here
to be resettle back after the termination of their TBP than if we put
in some support services. If we want these children to go up and be resilient
we have to put in support services and I think that is a human right which
they deserve.
PROF THOMAS:
But say we have all the support services, what can we do about the public
opinion, the racism, the hostility in the community that you mention?
MS PITTAWAY:
I think that's a matter of public education and while the Premiers Department
from New South Wales has just made available to our centre funding to
do education kits for primary and secondary schools to help combat this
racism and opinion. I think they are the only sorts of things at the moment
that we can do.
PROF THOMAS:
Do you apply for Living in Harmony projects?
MS PITTAWAY:
Yes.
PROF THOMAS: So
what did you have as a suggestion for an alternative? What kind of recommendation
can we make to have a reasonable chance of success?
MS PITTAWAY:
That's a difficult one. Our position is very much that we think that there
should not be detention of families, full stop. We do not believe that
women and children should be separated from fathers or other family members.
I think again there is sufficient research going right back to the holocaust
that that is detrimental to families and to children's future development.
I personally do not see a good way of detaining families in closed detention
especially isolated from their own communities. We would strongly recommend
systems such as are implemented in Sweden where there is very much community
surveillance of families in detention and some very minimal form of detention
as people arrive. But in terms of improvements in detention we just don't
see it as a possibility, thank you.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Any concluding statement?
MS PITTAWAY:
No.
DR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you very much for your evidence and submission and good luck with your
research.
SHORT BREAK [3.42pm]
RESUMES [4.10pm]
DR OZDOWSKI:
So we are starting the late afternoon session and I would like to welcome
Dr John Pace to come forward to give evidence. Could I ask you to make
an oath or affirmation.
JOHN PACE, AFFIRMED
[4.12pm]
DIRECTOR, AUSTRALIAN HUMAN RIGHTS CENTRE AND DELEGATE OF AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
ON A MISSION TO NAURU
DR OZDOWSKI: Could
I ask you to state your name, address, qualification and capacity in which
you are appearing for the record?
MR J. PACE: My
name is, John Pace. I live at number [address removed]. I am here in my
capacity as director of the Australian Human Rights Centre and as delegate
of Amnesty International on a mission to Nauru in November 2001.
DR OZDOWSKI:
I made a number of orders to protect the privacy of individuals and to
protect children in particular if you like. So I would like to ask you
not to identify any asylum seekers in your submission and also I would
like to ask you that the identity of third parties is not disclosed and
this includes also current or former employees at detention centres. Mr
Pace, could I ask you now to make an introductory statement.
MR PACE: Thank
you very much, Mr Commissioner, I would like to inform the Commission
that in November 2001 on the request of Amnesty International I conducted
a mission to the island of Nauru to observe the conditions of detention
of the asylum seekers that had been transported there on two shipments.
The first shipment being those who arrived on the Australian Naval Vessel,
the "Manora" and a second shipment being transported to Nauru
by the Australian Navy Vessel, the "Tobruk".
I remained in Nauru
for one week and in the course of my mission I had the opportunity of
being received by the chief secretary of the Government of the Republic
of Nauru as well as the head of the office of the International Organisation
for Migration and his deputy who was in charge of the refugee camps. In
the course of my mission I conducted interviews with the interviewing
teams from the UNHCR and from DIMIA and had occasion to access and speak
freely with the asylum seekers every day of my visit.
As a result of my
visit I drew up a report and I sent it to Amnesty in London. Accompanying
my report were a number of attachments including the official agreements
and documents signed by Australia and the Republic of Nauru as well as
the exchange of notes which were both entered into by the Republic of
Nauru and the IOM and the Republic of Nauru and the UNHCR as well as other
related agreements such as the tripartite agreement between the Australian
Protection Services, the Nauru Police Force and the IOM.
In addition to the
written report that I made to Amnesty and the attachments thereto, I received
from the asylum seekers written statements in their own language. Namely,
Arabic and Dari, in which they described to me the conditions, their experiences
of their shipment from the vessel in which they had arrived in the waters
or in the territory of Australia, between that transition and the arrival
on Nauru.
These documents have
also been submitted to Amnesty International and translations have been
made. They have not been made public as far as I am aware, Mr Commissioner.
More recently I was invited by Amnesty International to appear at a Senate
hearing on "a certain maritime incident." On that occasion I
took the opportunity of indicating the existence of the statements which
described the conditions of the shipment of these people as seen by them.
Which include of course references to children and treatment of children.
As on that occasion
and their admissability I suppose will have to be determined by this Commission,
especially in the light of what the directives you have issued. But in
this context I think it would be appropriate to cite the statement of
the Senate Committee in the context of this indication that I had given
them on 1 May 2002. The chairman essentially suggested that I do not proceed
with the submission of the statements because - and here I read page CMI1462
of the Hansard. He says to me that:
It is a possible
contempt of the Senate if a witness would be damaged in any way by someone
because of evidence they gave before a Senate Committee. That is put on
the record daily. But these people are beyond our jurisdiction, and we
therefore have no power to do that. What has caused us to pause is that
DIMIA will not guarantee that if things are adduced in these proceedings,
from people who are offshore outside our jurisdiction, they will not take
them into consideration. In those circumstances, we are on a warning that
these things may be taken into consideration and it is just a question
of balancing that.
The result or the
upshot of this was that I then of course in the interest of protecting
the asylum seekers desisted from handing the statements. These statements
make up about 69 pages in the original languages. They complete my report
to Amnesty International. I could stop here by way of opening.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Maybe for the moment just to let you know I requested the Department of
Immigration to facilitate a visit of this inquiry to both Nauru and Mannus
and I am awaiting the response. Also part of my concern is that the Commission
very rarely receives any communications from either Nauru or Mannus. We
certainly would welcome more information about what is happening over
there. So perhaps if I could ask you to use the remaining time to focus
on children in Nauru conditions there and advise this inquiry what is
happening over there.
MR PACE: Thank
you very much, Commissioner. When I was there there were 129 children
out of the 795 asylum seekers in the two camps. They ranged in age from
a few weeks old to
DR OZDOWSKI:
Some born over there?
MR PACE: Some
born over there. One I saw was newly born and there was a lady apparently
who was in labour at that time. There was also they ranged up to the age
of 16,17. Among them there were in one camp alone, eight unaccompanied
minors who I met personally and who explained to me how they got there
and why they were there. But the overall observation I made in regard
to the treatment of the asylum seekers which is in regard to the sense
of hopelessness and sense of severe psychological pressure I would say,
even then, attested to me by the many of the interviewers themselves was
the fact that in the case of children in particular there was problems
of education, problems of health.
When I was there
there was one public health doctor with two nurses for the 795 people.
I understand since then, because there has been some exchanges between
some of them and myself through other contacts in the meantime, that more
doctors have been brought in. But when I was there there was one doctor
for 795 - a general health, public health medical person. Also, the asylum
seekers themselves, in particular the Iraqi's, you see, the Afghani's
from the Manora shipment were only males because the family groups had
been diverted to New Zealand. So the bulk of the Afghani's were single,
except for a group of - a smaller group than the Iraqi's, but quite tough,
I must say, young couples with small children who came via the Tobruk.
Tough in the sense of brave, if I may. The Iraquis were trying to improvise
some kind of classroom and when I was there, in fact, the IOM colleagues
were looking for a carpenter to make benches so that they could sit in
a classroom.
DR OZDOWSKI: So
there is no school there?
MR PACE: Well,
there is a school in Nauru, but there is not a school in the camp. There
was no school in the camp.
DR OZDOWSKI: Can
children from the camp attend the school
MR PACE: When
I was there that was expressly forbidden, and that was not really - among
the interviews I made it was clearly stated to me by Nauruan officials
that this was considered a great shame because apparently the Nauru primary
and kindergarten facilities were good, modern, comparatively modern and
roomy and some Nauruans, anyway, that I talked to in the government and
the civilian area would have welcomed a little bus load to come down to
the town to share education.
DR OZDOWSKI:
So who prohibited that access to education?
MR PACE: Well,
you see, the IOM regime running the camp, who I must say for the record
are very high professionals of the best quality, but simply totally inexperienced
about running a camp. It was clear to me that they had absolutely
DR OZDOWSKI:
So they are highly professional in a different area?
MR PACE: That's
right. They are very professional, I am sure, in processing migration
requests, for instance, and resettlement requests, and I'm sure in perhaps
arranging for shipment of planes of refugees from one side of the planet
to the other. But they were clearly inexpert - very well-meaning, but
totally inadequate for the task that they were given of running two camps
of those size. Indeed, among the Iraqi's asylum seekers there was one
or two middle aged ladies who had teaching experience and they were the
ones who were volunteering to get the children together in a corner of
the camp. You see, the camp had no facilities other than residence, as
it were, if you can call it that.
Even though there
were - on the map you would see something called the library and clinic
and things like that, and when you go there you see a khaki tent which
is empty and a rotten table with nothing on it. So there were no infrastructure
at all at that time. The younger people were trying to arrange volleyball
games with some of the locals, so every two weeks they would try to arrange
for a group of local kids to come up to play volleyball with the
DR OZDOWSKI:
So there was free movement? Those people could move between the camp and
the rest?
MR PACE: You
could not - they could not leave the camp. You could not leave the camp.
You couldn't enter the camp without giving your name to the Chubb security
person at the gate. You could not bring gifts to these people. What some
Nauruan well-wishers were doing were hanging - I saw them myself - hanging
clothes on the fence during the night, so in the morning they could fish
them out and use them, because many of them - a whole shipload of them
had no clothes at all. They were trans-shipped because their boat was
sinking, or had sunk, so they were forced to jettison their belongings.
Well, without wishing
to sound strident or dramatic about it, but the situation of the children
in particular that I saw myself in Nauru at that time was to my mind very
serious. Physically
DR OZDOWSKI:
Did you see any of the Australian detention centres?
MR PACE: No,
I did not.
DR OZDOWSKI:
No?
MR PACE: No,
it was suggested to me when I came back here that I should perhaps. But,
quite honestly, Commissioner, I think that I have a pretty good idea of
what I don't want to be in myself, and certainly that's not Nauru. Nauru
is a - I feel it is hellish, honestly. It is difficult to describe, you
know, perhaps you may wish to - if you were privileged to go there now
perhaps you will see a much better set up, but that's difficult because
it's an island which you can ride around in 12 minutes and it's four and
a half hours away from Brisbane by plane. It's in the middle of nowhere.
There's no beaches. No vegetation, as such, except some dying palm trees.
On the other hand, this lunar landscape which is the most depressing thing
you can think of. There's nothing to do. There's no telephones, really,
or no - they have since got a satellite phone, two phones. They now, since
after I left, they share - now that there are 11 hundred-something of
them on Nauru.
But my concern for
the children in Nauru is particularly provoked, as it were, by the fact
that Nauru is a State party to the Child Convention. It's the only convention
that Nauru has ratified. Therefore, I would have expected Nauru to be
more sensitive to its obligations in regard to children than it is to
the other obligations. It has signed the ICCPR. Actually it signed when
I was there, and I wish I could claim credit for that, but it was a wonderful
coincidence. A wonderful coincidence. I was very happy afterwards when
I read that on the internet. But the child problem in regard to the international
obligations of Nauru are extremely serious, particularly given the fact
that these children are going through what they are.
When we prepared,
for the Australian Human Rights Centre, our submission to the Working
Group on Arbitrary Detention a few weeks ago, we had the opportunity of
indicating these aspects and should the Commission so wish we would be
more than happy to make available a copy of that version.
DR OZDOWSKI:
Yes, I would like to ask you to take that request on notice, if possible.
We would like to have these materials and if there is a need to keep the
whole material or parts of the material relating to names on a confidential
basis we would agree to do so.
MR PACE: Thank
you very much, indeed, sir. Commissioner, with regard to the statements
made to me in writing which have not yet seen the light of day, I understand
that Amnesty International is testifying before you, these are documents
that belong to Amnesty and I believe that they should form part of your
dossier because they are relevant to your mandate and, they are very relevant,
I would say, to your mandate.
DR OZDOWSKI:
The Amnesty already has testified so we will have to get in touch with
them.
MR PACE: Yes,
please, because, yes.
MR OZDOWSKI:
We will unfortunately have to finish now, would you like to make a concluding
statement?
MS LESNIE:
May ask one quick question?
MR OZDOWSKI:
Yes, one quick question.
MS LESNIE:
Well the question is quick I am not sure about the answer.
MR PACE: I
will do my best.
MS LESNIE:
I was wondering whether you got an impression when you were in Nauru who
was controlling what was going on there, was it IOM, was it UNHCR, was
it CHUBB, was it Eurest, was it DIMIA, who guiding, what was going on
inside the camp there?
MR PACE: Who
was top dog? In the management sense of providing the facilities, logistics,
it is IOM. The final word say in the top dog sense my feeling is that
it was Australia.
MS LESNIE:
Who was it that said the gates shall be closed, that the people inside
the camp can't leave when they want to?
MR PACE: IOM.
IOM you see they have one or two meetings every week I think one or two
every week on Tuesdays and Thursdays among them to run these camps and
they discuss these aspects so even though you do not see the Australian
presence manifest physically, it is quite clear - first of all it is not
Nauru, let's exclude that even though the answer you will get is that
it is Nauru's problem.
Nauru has made it
very clear to me in writing and orally that it is only doing this because
Australia is paying it to do so. Secondly, it is not IOM because IOM -
again had they had any experience about running camps - the last thing
they would do would wish to create an incarceration atmosphere on an island
like that. UNHCR wouldn't have done it that way for sure. UNHCR was only
there because they had very little option having because of the antecedents.
So at least by elimination
I would say that and that it is certainly Australia that is running the
show and other than by elimination I would think that the fact that Australian
money and Australian under infrastructure is being put in, there was being
put in daily there in boatloads next to me doesn't give the slightest
doubt that it is Australia that is running the show there.
MS LESNIE:
Thank you.
MR OZDOWSKI: Thank
you very much. We may be in touch with you at a later date to ask for
some further information but thank you very much
MR PACE: Thank
you Commissioner.
MR OZDOWSKI:
for your submission and thank you for availing yourself. Thank you very
much.
MR OZDOWSKI:
Now the next hearing it will be a hearing in camera so I will have to
ask everyone to leave the room.
SHORT BREAK [4.34pm]
CONTINUING IN
TRANSCRIPT-IN-CONFIDENCE
Last
Updated 9 January 2003.