DIAC response to 2008 Immigration detention report - Summary of Observations following the Inspection of Mainland Immigration Detention Report
Response to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s 2008 Immigration Detention Report
- Download PDF [240 kB]
- Download Word [540 kB]
Introduction
The Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) welcomes the release of
the 2008 Immigration Detention Report by the Australian Human Rights
Commission (AHRC) and acknowledges the important independent scrutiny of the
immigration system provided by the AHRC.
The Department appreciates the Commission’s recognition of many of the
immigration detention reforms that have taken place in recent years. The 2008
report also highlights a number of areas requiring further improvement –
DIAC is already working to address a large number of these issues and will give
active consideration to many of the recommendations in the AHRC report in the
ongoing reform process.
Immigration detention is an integral part of Australia’s border
security and an important component in ensuring the integrity of the migration
program.
Immigration detention has attracted a considerable degree of scrutiny and
comment, and has been subject to considerable reform, over recent years. The
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy, which was announced by
the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Chris Evans, on 29
July 2008, represents the latest and most significant reform of
Australia’s immigration detention system.
The New Directions in Detention policy provides for seven Key Immigration
Detention Values to guide detention policy and detention practices into the
future.
Key Immigration Detention Values
- Mandatory detention is an essential component of
strong border control.
- To support the integrity of Australia’s immigration program, three
groups will be subject to mandatory detention:
- all unauthorised arrivals, for management of health, identity and
security risks to the community
- unlawful non-citizens who present unacceptable risks to the community
and
- unlawful non-citizens who have repeatedly refused to comply with their
visa conditions.
- all unauthorised arrivals, for management of health, identity and
- Children, including juvenile foreign fishers and, where possible, their
families, will not be detained in an immigration detention centre (IDC).
- Detention that is indefinite or otherwise arbitrary is not acceptable and
the length and conditions of detention, including the appropriateness of both
the accommodation and the services provided, would be subject to regular review.
- Detention in IDCs is only to be used as a last resort and for the
shortest practicable time.
- People in detention will be treated fairly and reasonably within the law.
- Conditions of detention will ensure the inherent dignity of the human
person.
In giving effect to the Government’s reforms, it is the
Minister’s intention to initially implement administrative and regulatory
reform and then pursue possible legislative changes. Reflecting this approach,
DIAC has already implemented a number of new policies and practices, while
others are under active review.
A major stakeholder consultation process to inform the implementation of the
New Directions in Detention reforms was recently completed. In addition, as part
of the broad reform process, DIAC is already taking into account the
recommendations in the first report of the Joint Standing Committee on
Migration’s review of immigration detention, published in December 2008.
Many of the AHRC’s recommendations in the 2008 Immigration Detention
Report will similarly be given active consideration.
Explanatory Note: In DIAC’s response to the 2008
Immigration Detention Report, the Commission’s recommendations have
been reproduced and appear in grey text boxes. Footnotes have also been used to
reference the recommendations as they appeared in the version of the
Commission’s report provided to DIAC on
10 December 2008.
The
initial chapters of the Commission’s report deal with an introduction, an
overview, methodology and background. The report summarises its recommendations
in Chapter 3 and elaborates on recommendations and observations from Chapter 6
onwards.
6 Monitoring of
standards in immigration detention
6.1 Standards for conditions and treatment
persons in immigration detention should be codified in legislation. These should
be based on relevant international human rights
standards.[1]
DIAC already has put in place mechanisms to
ensure minimum standards for the treatment of people in immigration detention as
detailed below.
Detention Value 6 states: ‘People in detention will be treated fairly
and reasonably within the law,’ and Detention Value 7 states:
‘Conditions of detention will ensure the inherent dignity of the human
person.’
DIAC has implemented, and continues to develop, instructional material
(Detention Instructions) that direct how departmental staff and service
providers must interact with and support people in immigration detention. These
instructions are reviewed regularly to ensure they are up to date and represent
best practice. Adherence to these instructions is stipulated in Chief Executive
Instruction 30. DIAC’s contract management area also monitors service
providers’ performance to ensure compliance with Detention
Instructions.
In June 2007, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners published
the Standards for Health Services in Australian IDCs. These standards
stipulate the level of health care that people in immigration detention can
expect to receive. While the standards are being adhered to currently, new
arrangements are currently being negotiated that will compel DIAC’s health
services providers to adhere to these standards.
Broad reform of the immigration detention framework to reflect the
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy and Key Immigration
Detention Values is currently being progressed. Detention Values 6 and 7 are
particularly relevant to the Commission’s recommendation concerning the
standards for conditions and treatment of persons in immigration detention.
Detention Value 6 states: ‘People in detention will be treated fairly and
reasonably within the law,’ and Detention Value 7 states:
‘Conditions of detention will ensure the inherent dignity of the human
person.’
As indicated above, it is the Minister’s intention to initially
implement administrative and regulatory reform and then pursue possible
legislative changes to reflect the Government’s policies. DIAC undertakes
to consider the Commission’s recommendation when progressing policy
development in these areas and prior to embarking on possible legislative
changes.
6.2 External scrutiny of immigration detention facilities
Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and establish an independent
National Preventive Mechanism to conduct regular inspections of all places of
detention, including immigration detention
facilities.[2]
The Australian Government has already indicated
that it is working toward acceding to the Optional Protocol to the Convention
against Torture.
Given the importance of treaty obligations, a number of procedures must be
completed before Australia can accede to the Optional Protocol, as it is
important to ensure domestic legislation, policies and practice comply with the
treaty obligations.
Consultations with states and territories are continuing and possible options
for a national mechanism are the subject of these discussions. The Government
has also sought the views of non-government organisations.
A whole-of-government approach will be taken in completing and assessing the
results of consultations before preparing a National Interest Analysis that will
be tabled in Parliament. Following tabling, the Joint Standing Committee on
Treaties will hold a public inquiry.
7 Number of people in detention
8 Length and uncertainty of detention
Recommendations: Australia’s mandatory detention law should be
repealed.
The Migration Act should be amended so that immigration detention occurs
only when necessary. This should be the exception, not the norm. It must be for
a minimal period, be reasonable and be a proportionate means of achieving at
least one of the aims outlined in international law. These limited grounds for
detention should be clearly prescribed in the Migration Act.
The Migration Act should be amended so that the decision to detain a person
is subject to prompt review by a court, in accordance with international law.
The Migration Act should be amended to include periodic independent reviews
of the ongoing need to detain an individual, and a maximum time limit for
detention.[3]
As indicated above, it is the Minister’s
intention in implementing the Government’s New Directions in Detention
policy and Key Immigration Detention Values to initially implement
administrative and regulatory reform and then pursue possible legislative
changes. DIAC has already implemented a number of new policies and practices,
while others are under active review. DIAC undertakes to take the
Commission’s recommendations regarding the length and uncertainty of
detention into account prior to embarking on possible legislative changes.
Elements of the Commission’s recommendations regarding the length and
uncertainty of detention are also reflected in the recent recommendations of the
Joint Standing Committee on Migration and are dealt with in the
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy.
The retention of mandatory detention is a matter of Government policy. The
Government maintains a commitment to a system of mandatory detention, as
reflected in Key Immigration Detention Values 1 and 2:
- Mandatory detention is an essential component of strong border control.
- To support the integrity of Australia’s immigration program, three
groups will be subject to mandatory detention:
- all unauthorised arrivals, for management of health, identity and
security risks to the community
- unlawful non-citizens who present unacceptable risks to the community
and
- unlawful non-citizens who have repeatedly refused to comply with their
visa conditions.
- all unauthorised arrivals, for management of health, identity and
Key Immigration Detention Value 5 states that
‘Detention in IDCs is only to be used as a last resort and for the
shortest practicable time.’ As the Minister stated on 29 July
2008, under the Government’s reforms the onus of proof will be
reversed in determining the ongoing detention of a person. A departmental
decision-maker will have to justify why a person should be detained against
these values that presume that that person should be in the community.
Appropriate procedures to effect this Key Immigration Detention Value are being
considered and a review of the Client Placement Model is currently underway.
The Government’s New Directions in Detention reforms also include
arrangements to increase the transparency and robustness of detention review.
Key Immigration Detention Value 4 states: ‘Detention that is
indefinite or otherwise arbitrary is not acceptable and the length and condition
of detention, including the appropriateness of both the accommodation and the
services provided, would be subject of regular review.’ A new senior
departmental officer review every three months is being established to determine
whether the further detention of an individual is justified. Additionally, a
six-monthly review of detention placements by the Commonwealth Ombudsman will be
instituted.
The possibility of further changes to review arrangements for detention,
including the introduction of judicial review, will remain under consideration
as the arrangements already announced by the Government take effect.
9 Staff attitudes
future staff are provided with adequate training to educate them about the human
rights of persons in immigration detention. Staff training and performance
management procedures should ensure that all staff treat immigration detainees
in a humane manner, with respect for their inherent dignity, and with fairness
and cultural sensitivity.[4]
The current Detention Service Provider (DSP),
Global Solutions Limited (GSL) is contractually required to provide appropriate
training to its staff. As part of the Initial Training Course (ITC), GSL has a
module specifically dealing with the human rights of people in immigration
detention. In addition, all GSL officers must accept and sign the GSL Code of
Conduct that encompasses respect for human rights.
The tender documents for the new contract encompass an increased focus on the
training requirements for DSP and DIAC staff. Additionally, roll-out of
instructional materials for use by staff working in the immigration detention
environment is planned to enhance the effective use of these materials. It is
envisaged that there will be a role here also for the Training College.
DIAC staff members working in immigration detention facilities are given
a comprehensive four-week training program. The Immigration Training
College delivers this training and provides accreditation to Certification IV
level in its current course.
Both the DIAC and GSL training programs cover issues such as humane
treatment, cultural sensitivity and dealing with victims of torture and
trauma.
Importantly, all detention activities and policies are underpinned by the
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy and the Key Immigration
Detention Values. Detention Value 7 states: ‘Conditions of detention
will ensure the inherent dignity of the human person.’
In implementing the Government’s New Directions in Detention policy,
DIAC acknowledges that there is also scope to improve the manner in which it
deals with people in immigration detention who come from a diverse range of
cultures and experiences. Accordingly, DIAC is striving to identify and
implement improvements as part of the current review of detention policy.
10 Mainland IDCs: cross-cutting concerns
10.1 Detention infrastructure and environment
Perth IDCs should be undertaken as a matter of priority. This should include the
demolition of Stage 1 at the Villawood IDC as a matter of urgency, and its
replacement with a new facility. This is subject to there being a continuing
need for such a facility, given the Government’s stated intention to
detain people in IDCs only as a last resort. It should also include
comprehensive refurbishments to the Perth IDC, to address the issues raised in
this report.[5]
DIAC shares the Commission’s concerns
surrounding some infrastructure at Villawood Immigration Detention Centre
(VIDC). The 2008-09 Budget included $1.1 million for a feasibility study for
the redevelopment of the VIDC. This redevelopment is in the planning and
approval stage following the Government’s approval to progress the project
for consideration in the 2010 Budget context.
Current network plans are for Villawood to be a referral centre for
higher-risk cases. The size and configuration of the centre will be examined in
detail as part of the design development.
In addition, a total of $7 million has been approved for urgent interim works
at VIDC including the refurbishment of Stage 1. The works will improve the
amenity for clients accommodated in Stage 1, create a better visits experience
and includes refurbishment of internal spaces and the outdoor recreation areas
and courtyards. Other works include refurbishment of the Management Support
Unit (MSU), part removal and realignment of fences in Stages 2 and 3.
Early works have been completed in the MSU and Stage 1 concurrently with the
design and tendering for the remainder of the works which will commence in
January 2009.
Perth Immigration Detention Centre (IDC) is being refurbished and is midway
through construction. The refurbishment will provide wide-ranging improvements
to amenity and operations of the Centre, within the confines of the current
site.
As part of the refurbishments being undertaken at the Perth IDC there will be
more room allocated for providing specific programs, such as religious
activities. One of the previous dormitory rooms is planned to be refurbished
into a multi-purpose room. This room will be available for uses such as
recreational, educational and religious activities.
10.2 Physical health care
(a) Availability and quality of health care
Recommendations: DIAC should ensure that detainees are updated
regularly about the status of any requests they have made for external
specialist treatment, and any reasons why a referral has not been
approved.
DIAC should ensure that detainees can request and obtain a second medical
examination or opinion if they wish to do
so.[6]
As is the case in the wider Australian community,
there can sometimes be delays in obtaining appointments with specialists. As a
standard process, people in immigration detention are regularly updated on the
status of any referral to specialists, and are notified both orally and in
writing as soon as specialist appointment details are known. Where a person in
immigration detention’s request for medical treatment is considered
unwarranted by medical staff, the person is immediately advised of the reason
why.
DIAC’s current Health Service Provider at IDCs is International Health
and Medical Services (IHMS). According to IHMS’s Standard Operating
Policies and Procedures, if a person in immigration detention wishes to seek a
second opinion, unless there is a clinical indication for this to occur, this
would be facilitated at the person’s own expense. IHMS staff is able to
assist clients in making any external appointments. Additionally, DIAC will
usually agree to meet any costs associated with providing the DSP escorts for an
off-site appointment. Where opinions as a result of third-party assessments
conflict with advice provided by IHMS, all efforts are taken to resolve this
conflict in consultation with the Medical Director of IHMS.
(b) Procedures prior to leaving detention
DIAC should ensure that a health discharge assessment is conducted; a health
discharge summary is provided to the person in a language they can understand;
copies of all relevant medical records and test results are provided to the
person; and appropriate arrangements are made for their follow-on medical care
in the Australian community or in the country of return.
DIAC should review
its policy regarding certification of ‘fitness to travel’, in
particular the provision that allows certification to be validly based on a
physical examination completed within the previous 28
days.[7]
To ensure that people have some continuity of
health care in either the country to which they are returning, or the Australian
community, all people being discharged from immigration detention are provided
with a Health Discharge Assessment. This provides a summary of the
person’s medical history and current health status.
Where a person is being removed from Australia or transferred interstate by
aircraft, the Health Discharge Assessment will provide a fitness to travel
certification. In some situations, consideration is given to having the
discharge summary translated into the client’s nominated language. An
example would be if the client has a significant health condition for which
they require follow up with a specialist in the country to which they are
returning. Where clinically necessary any relevant medical referrals, records
and/or test results are provided.
In regard to follow-up care in the community or in the country to which a
person may be returning, arrangements are put in place where this is clinically
indicated. For follow-up care in the return country, the person is usually
provided with the contact details of an appropriate provider and encouraged to
contact the provider on their return. From experience, this system has proven
more successful than making an actual appointment for a person.
Generally, people leaving immigration detention are physically fit and
healthy. As such, Departmental policy currently states that a fitness to travel
certification remains valid for 28 days from the date of the person’s last
physical examination by a registered nurse of general practitioner. However,
where there is an obvious or suspected change in a person’s health status
within this 28 day period or the person requests an updated physical examination
this will be undertaken by the Health Services Provider, at which time the
person’s fitness to travel certification will be reassessed.
10.3 Mental health care
(a) Availability of mental health staff
support services are provided in immigration detention facilities whenever those
services are required by detainees. DIAC should seek regular feedback from
onsite mental health staff and act promptly to increase the availability of
psychological support services when that feedback indicates a need in the
current detainee population.[8]
DIAC currently engages Professional Support
Services (PSS) to provide psychological and counselling services within IDCs.
DIAC regularly meets with PSS to discuss contractual issues and, most
importantly, ensure that appropriate care is provided.
DIAC is currently reviewing psychological and other counselling service
arrangements under the Psychological and Other Counselling Services Agreement to
ensure clients are well supported and provided with an appropriate level of
mental health care. Currently psychological and other counselling services are
based on centre occupancy levels; however this is used as a guide only. The
Agreement allows PSS staff to use their own judgement and provide additional
services when required.
(b) Mental health referrals and recommendations
immigration detention facility who has, or is suspected to have, significant
mental health concerns or a background of torture or trauma is considered for
community detention or a bridging visa as soon as
possible.[9]
DIAC has procedures in place under which the
physical and mental health of all people entering immigration detention is
assessed by formally accredited health professionals. The Department has case
management support and health management practices in place for all people in
immigration detention, including those clients who have, or are suspected to
have, significant mental health concerns or who have experienced torture or
trauma. If a person is found to be in need of psychological support or other
health care to address the effects of torture and trauma, this is taken into
account when they are placed within the detention network, particularly in
respect of whether they are considered for Community Detention.
DIAC’s Health Services Provider advises DIAC of any person in detention
who has, or is suspected to have, significant health concerns. In most
instances, these people are placed outside an IDC. The standard process for
people in immigration detention who are suspected to have torture and/or trauma
issues is that the Health Services Provider advises DIAC of this, and the person
is subsequently referred for consideration of Community Detention as a priority.
Delays sometimes experienced with these referrals usually stem from delays in
obtaining appointments with specialist torture and trauma providers, who assess
clients and provide summary reports to assist the referral process. The
procedures around this have been improved recently so that referrals can now be
made based solely on written advice from the Health Services Provider, rather
than waiting for specialist reports.
Client reviews are conducted regularly, and decisions are made on a
case-by-case basis in relation to client placement and support needs, or
possible bridging visa grants. The circumstances of a person’s detention
will be reviewed by a senior departmental officer every three months. The
Department is currently developing the methodology and format of the three month
senior officer review of detention in the context of the Government's new Key
Immigration Detention Values. The circumstances of a person’s detention
may be reviewed more often if new information comes to light or circumstances
change.
The Client Placement Model that is used to determine the most appropriate
form of detention states:
Assessment and consideration should be given to a person’s physical and
mental health (including any physical disabilities and/or evidence that the
person may have suffered torture or trauma). Health information and
recommendations regarding the medical care arrangements for a person in
detention will be made by the health services provider and may occur following
the induction of a person into the detention accommodation location or as part
of new information that may trigger a fresh placement assessment. Together with
other factors of an individual’s case, it may be appropriate for people
with special health needs that cannot be cared for in an IDC to be considered
for placements such as alternative detention or community detention.
(c) Suicide and self-harm observation
observation in Stages 2 and 3 at the Villawood IDC should not be transferred to
observation rooms in Stage 1. Purpose-built observation rooms should be
constructed in Stages 2 and 3. Detainees should be observed in their own rooms
when appropriate.[10]
It is expected that new purpose-built observation
rooms in stage 1 at the VIDC will be completed in mid 2009. The present
observation rooms located in Stage 1 of Villawood will be developed into
high-care accommodation.
The existing MSU in stage 3 is also to be modified and extended as high care
and observation accommodation. This will negate the requirement to transfer
stage 2 and 3 people in immigration detention to stage 1 for observation. These
works are scheduled for completion by July 2009.
10.4 Recreational activities
(a) Outdoor space for sport and recreation
Recommendations: DIAC should ensure that necessary
changes are made at the IDCs so that all detainees are provided with adequate
access to open grassy space for sport and recreation. This is a particular
priority in Stage 1 at Villawood IDC, Perth IDC and Maribyrnong IDC.
In the
meantime, DIAC and GSL should ensure that detainees in Maribyrnong IDC and Perth
IDC have regular access to organised sporting activities, such as soccer,
outside the detention centre. All detainees at Villawood IDC, including those in
Stage 1, should be permitted to use the soccer pitch in Stage 3 for sporting
activities on a regular basis.[11]
In 2009, DIAC will undertake water mitigation
works that will make it possible to create grassed areas at Northern IDC.
The Perth IDC courtyards are being redesigned as part of the refurbishment.
While not large and grassy, they will be enlarged, purpose designed for
effective exercise and human interaction and surfaced artificially as is
appropriate for more intensive use.
At Villawood, the Stage 1 outdoor sport area is being refurbished and the
grassy area between Dormitories 2 and 3 is being redesigned completely for more
effective use.
detention in Villawood have access to the soccer pitch. Swimming is planned to
be offered to people when a suitable location is identified. Group excursions
that may include sports activities may be introduced after the refurbishment and
if the number of people in the centre increases.
(b) Access to reading materials
onsite library area stocked with reading materials in the principal languages
spoken by detainees at the centre. All detainees should have regular access to
this area.
Management at each of the IDCs should explore the possibility of
borrowing reading materials on a regular basis from a local library or a mobile
library service.[12]
GSL is contractually required to provide access
to appropriate reading material. This is achieved through a variety of means
including mobile library services, excursions to local library facilities and a
stock of onsite material. DIAC regularly checks with GSL to ensure these
facilities are provided.
Recently, DIAC instructed GSL to provide strategies on how to improve the
quality and use of the VIDC library.
The Northern IDC has an arrangement with local Darwin City Council libraries
to borrow books in Bahasa, Indonesian and Mandarin, as required. A stock of
books loaned from the libraries is held on site at the Northern IDC and
exchanged each month. Books are exchanged more frequently if there are large
numbers or prolific readers in the centre. People in immigration detention have
also been taken to the local library to select their own reading material. A
recent Mandarin speaking person was reading about twenty books each week, and
was taken to the library weekly. After he had exhausted the local library
supplies, inter-library loans were arranged. GSL has also purchased books in
Indonesian, Mandarin and English, which are held in the recreation rooms on site
and can be signed out by people to read. Additional books in Indonesian
language suitable for juveniles have been purchased for juvenile foreign fishers
who are held in alternate detention in Darwin. Northern IDC’s on-site
library is being expanded over time. Indonesian and Mandarin daily papers are
ordered for the centre and are delivered throughout the week. The Indonesian
weekly magazine Tempo is provided each week.
Maribyrnong’s library area has been completed and people have permanent
access to foreign-language reading material. The centre has an ongoing
relationship with the local library service to provide people with
foreign-language books.
The requirement for reading material can be met by various means and at times
books have not been used by people in immigration detention. In Maribyrnong for
example, there has been extensive use of on-line reading material since the
rollout of computers into each zone and books are made available and used as
part of the education program.
(c) Gym facilities
the Perth IDC, at Maribyrnong IDC, and in Stage 1 at Villawood IDC. These
facilities should be enclosed to ensure adequate privacy and protection from the
weather.[13]
Upgrades are in place for Perth IDC with a
ventilated covered area and new equipment. Improvements to Villawood Stage 1
gym facilities will be included as part of works during early 2009. Maribyrnong
weather protection and privacy improvements are currently unfunded and will be
considered as part of the 2009 budget review.
10.5 Educational programs
immigration detainees from undertaking a course of study that leads to a formal
qualification. DIAC should allow detainees to enrol in substantive education
courses at TAFE and other educational or vocational training institutions.
Enrolment could be by correspondence. However, where possible, DIAC should
consider permitting detainees to attend some classes in person.
classes at the Northern IDC for detainees who wish to participate. This should
include ESL classes and computing classes.
space dedicated to educational activities. In particular, DIAC should upgrade
the Perth IDC to provide dedicated classroom space. The Commission is of the
view that Stage 1 at Villawood IDC is an inappropriate facility and should be
demolished. However, if DIAC intends to continue to use Stage 1, it should
upgrade the facility to provide dedicated space for educational
classes.[14]
Historically, longer-term people in immigration
detention have not been given access to formally accredited courses offered by
tertiary institutions which lead to a substantive qualification. If allowed,
this would represent an inequity for lawful full-fee paying students and would
have the potential to undermine Student visa policy objectives.
The Government’s Key Immigration Detention Value 5 states that
“Detention in IDCs is only to be used as a last resort and for the
shortest practicable time”. As a consequence of this policy, it is
expected that the incidence and duration of detention will be significantly
reduced, further rendering it impracticable for people in immigration detention
to embark on a course of study of extended duration.
DIAC provides a range of activities and programs, including educational
programs, to people in immigration detention. Adults may undertake community
college, vocational or adult education courses and may obtain a certificate or
other accreditation for their studies. Generally, the educational programs
accessed by people in immigration detention are of a short duration, usually up
to four months.
Recreational activities are provided to people accommodated at the Northern
IDC. The centre’s caseload, mainly illegal foreign fishers who remain in
immigration detention for only a couple of weeks, means that it is usually
impracticable to commence structured educational programs. While Northern IDC
has commenced a procurement process for a service provider to conduct
conversational English classes, the demand for structured English as a second
language and computing courses is low because of the short duration of most
peoples’ stay and because they generally do not have a high level of
English literacy or access to computers when they return home.
The computer area in Perth has also been used as a classroom as the people in
immigration detention numbers have been very low. An alternate computing area
will be provided in the new multi purpose dining room.
A scope of the works for Stage 1 of Villawood has been tendered and includes
designs for improved educational facilities in the central area of Stage1.
These are scheduled for construction later in 2009.
While no child is accommodated in an IDC, in accordance with Government
policy, all school-aged children in community detention attend primary or
secondary school.
10.6 External
excursions
of regular external excursions from immigration detention facilities, and
include these standards in the contract with the detention services provider.
DIAC should monitor compliance with these standards on an ongoing basis and take
appropriate remedial action when they are not being complied with.
group excursions, and make them available to detainees in all sections of the
centre. Maribyrnong management should introduce regular group excursions for all
detainees. Management at the Perth IDC and Northern IDC should facilitate
detainee requests for home visits or other individual excursions where
possible.
sufficient resources to provide escorts for regular external
excursions.[15]
A large number of excursions are facilitated for
people in immigration detention, including those who have had their visas
cancelled under section 501 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). People
in immigration detention can request an excursion, including people who have had
a visa cancelled on character grounds. DIAC policy and procedures state that
the DSP and the department will ensure that evaluation of the request is
progressed quickly.
Excursion requests are considered according to necessary and current risk
assessments on a case-by-case basis. Generally, if the DSP is given enough lead
time, there are few restrictions relating to requests for excursions.
DIAC is currently reviewing procedures for excursions to ensure they better
reflect the Government’s New Directions in Detention policy and the Key
Immigration Detention Values. DIAC will consider the Commission’s
recommendations, including those concerning resources allocated to excursions,
as part of this review.
There has been a progressive increase in the number and frequency of
organised group external excursions from VIDC over the past twelve months.
Excursions have also been progressively expanded to include people classified
across the range of risk levels. Northern and Perth IDCs welcome and will
facilitate home visits if requested. Both Northern and Perth IDCs already
actively facilitate individual excursions.
10.7 Use of restraints
procedures regarding the use of restraints on immigration detainees during trips
outside immigration detention facilities, to ensure that restraints are only
used when absolutely necessary. Restraints should only be used after a thorough
risk assessment has been conducted for the individual detainee for the
particular trip in question. If it is deemed necessary to use restraints, they
should be covered while the detainee is in public view and they should be
removed for appearances in courts and tribunals.
restraints to be removed in time-sensitive situations that may arise - for
example, an emergency health issue or a request to use toilet facilities.
Current and future GSL staff should be trained on these procedures. This
training should emphasise the use of techniques which ensure that, when it is
absolutely necessary to restrain a detainee, that person is restrained in
dignity and with minimum use of
force.[16]
Restraints are only used after a thorough risk
assessment is conducted and following verbal approval from the DDSP’s
Director of Detention Services. If, as a result of that risk assessment, it is
decided that restraints will be used to mitigate risks, then they are applied
for the minimum period required. Officers are encouraged to continually observe
any change in circumstances and adjust the mitigation strategies in accordance
with DIAC’s and the DSP's clear guidelines on restraints and their use.
Presently, there are no plans to formally review these guidelines, but DIAC
and the DSP continually strive to implement recognised best practice principles
in all areas, and the use of restraints is no different.
The DSP's staff is required to undertake extensive training. Aspects of this
training include both the use of restraints and, importantly, other methods of
conflict de-escalation and behavioural management. DIAC and the DSP work
together very closely to maintain and respect peoples’ dignity while
ensuring the safety and welfare of others.
10.8 Access to communication facilities
internet for immigration detainees, particularly at the Northern IDC and the
Perth IDC.[17]
DIAC has a scheduled program in place to install
additional internet facilities into centres.
Five extra personal computers and internet facilities will be installed at
the Northern IDC in early 2009.
The five internet facilities at Perth IDC are sufficient to cater for the
current low numbers at the centre. These are being supplemented with additional
outlets in the dining room to improve access at all hours.
DIAC will continue to monitor the level of computer and internet usage and,
if the need arises, install more internet stations.
10.9 Provision of information to
detainees
(a) Client placement
detention, DIAC should promptly inform that person about the various
detention arrangements available to them, including community detention,
alternative detention in the community, IRH and/or immigration transit
accommodation.
informed of the reasons for their placement in a particular detention facility
or arrangement. This should include explaining the risk assessment process. When
a detainee makes a formal request to be moved to a different section of the
facility, or to a different place of detention, DIAC or GSL should respond
promptly in writing and provide reasons if the request is refused.
time of its 2009 annual visits. This should reflect the Government’s new
directions in immigration detention, in particular that detention in IDCs is to
be used as a last resort and for the shortest practicable time, and that the
presumption will be that persons will remain in the community while their
immigration status is
resolved.[18]
All people entering immigration detention are
given an orientation and introduction to the services available to them in each
facility.
Currently, people in immigration detention are informed of the reason for
their detention, for example if they have overstayed their visa or their visa
has been cancelled, and it is explained why they are not currently eligible for
the grant of a bridging visa. On entering immigration detention, people are not
generally informed of why they have been placed in a particular form of
detention, but if a person is moved from one form of detention to another, they
are notified in writing and encouraged to discuss this with departmental
staff.
DIAC is currently reviewing the client placement model to better reflect the
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy. As part of this review
DIAC undertakes to consider the Commission’s suggestions with a view to
ensuring that people in immigration detention are more clearly informed of the
circumstances of their detention.
A revised client placement model is due for full implementation during
2009.
(b) Case management
immigration detainee is provided with frequent updates regarding progress with
their immigration case.[19]
Case managers are required to provide active
management of the resolution of all cases of people in immigration detention.
While there are no specific instructions about the frequency of contact, case
managers must maintain regular contact with their clients even if there is no
specific issue of progress to report. The issue of ensuring minimum contact
frequency will be reviewed in light of the Commission’s comments.
(c) Induction materials
detainees, upon entering detention, are promptly provided with current and
comprehensive induction materials containing information including, but not
limited to, the details set out in the above section.
translated into the main languages spoken by the detainee population. Each
detainee should be provided with their own copy in a language they understand.
If this is not possible, an interpreter should be provided, in person, to go
through the materials with the detainee in their preferred
language.[20]
All people entering immigration detention are
provided with an induction to that facility, including participating in an
induction interview with the DSP. This induction includes information on
accommodation, dining, access to health care, access to pastoral care,
recreational activities, visitors and acceptable standards of behaviour. This
induction is provided in a language that is understood by the person and
qualified interpreters are used when required. As part of the induction
interview, people are given an induction booklet, available in the eight most
common languages. DIAC and the DSP regularly review the current booklet to
ensure it contains relevant, accurate and up to date information. The booklets
vary between facilities to provide local and relevant information for each
site.
DIAC is also preparing material that will be translated into appropriate
languages to supplement the induction process. This new material will include a
handbook which details centre-based information for people accommodated in
Immigration Transit Accommodation (ITA) as well as brochures explaining the
Purchase Allowance Scheme which operates in certain immigration detention
facilities. The Department facilitates interpreting services as required.
Additionally, people in immigration detention are actively encouraged to
approach the DSP, Health Service Providers or departmental staff if they have
any queries or need particular assistance. People in immigration detention are
also encouraged to complain about any aspects of their detention about which
they are concerned. Promotional material in several languages (including
Arabic, Hindi, Mandarin and Vietnamese) is displayed informing people in
immigration detention that complaints may be made to Departmental staff, DSP
staff, the Ombudsman’s Office, the Australian Human Rights Commission and
the Australian Red Cross about any aspects of a person’s detention and
that relevant processes are in place to receive and respond to those
complaints.
Information about health care
All people entering immigration
detention are offered a Health Induction Assessment, and if they consent, this
assessment is conducted within three days of the person entering detention. For
people in an IDC, this assessment is conducted by an IHMS registered nurse or
general practitioner, who tells the person about access to and the availability
of health services. Where necessary, telephone interpreters are used through
Translating Interpreting Services (TIS).
The department is close to finalising a Health Handbook, which will
provide easy to understand information on health services at VIDC, as well as
other relevant health information. Once finalised, this handbook will be
translated into several key languages and distributed to people in immigration
detention at the time of their Health Induction Assessment and on demand
throughout their time in detention. A Health Handbook outlining health
services at Perth IDC, MIDC, Northern IDC and Christmas Island IDC will be
drafted following the finalisation of the new contract arrangements with the
Department’s preferred tenderer for health services.
People in Perth Immigration Residential Housing (PIRH) and Sydney Immigration
Residential Housing (SIRH) are provided with a pamphlet at the time of their
induction to the IRH by the DSP. This pamphlet has information on using health
services in the IRH. This pamphlet has been translated into several
frequently-used languages.
People in Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation (BITA) and Melbourne
Immigration Transit Accommodation (MITA) are provided with a pamphlet at the
time of their induction to the ITA by the DSP. This pamphlet has information on
using health services in the ITA. Arrangements are currently being made to have
the MITA and BITA brochures translated into several frequently-used
languages.
People in Community Detention receive a pack of information from the Health
Services Provider setting out the process for accessing health services. This
information pack is available in several frequently-used languages.
10.10 Interpreters and translation
(a) Interpreters
interpreters at immigration detention facilities. Where there is a significant
group of detainees who speak the same language, DIAC should consider employing
an interpreter to work onsite on a regular basis. Concerns previously expressed
by GSL regarding the use of one full-time interpreter could be overcome by
employing or contracting several part-time or casual interpreters to work onsite
on a rostered basis.
present for health and mental health appointments.
explaining how detainees can access an interpreter. The information on the
posters should be translated into the main languages spoken by the detainee
population, and should include the Telephone Interpreting Service phone
number.[21]
A significant proportion of the people in
immigration detention population are either bilingual, speak English as a first
language or have spent considerable time in the Australian community and have
functional English.
However, DIAC and its service providers work with interpreters to facilitate
communication with people in immigration detention who may not be proficient in
English and produce and/or disseminate information about services, policies and
issues regarding immigration detention in English and other relevant languages
where feasible. Written information is made available in other languages as
appropriate.
When required the TIS provides services to DIAC, the DSP and the Health
Service Providers. Posters are displayed in all centres explaining how to use
TIS. Posters are displayed in the eight most common languages. DIAC will audit
the presence of these posters and take remedial action where necessary.
People in immigration detention are free to request a TIS person to translate
the contents of letters or documents for them at any time. When a large
proportion of the group is identified as speaking a particular language,
translated forms and other material are made available in that language. For
example, the ITA Handbook is currently being translated in Arabic, Cantonese,
Japanese, Malaysian, Mandarin, Tamil, Thai and Vietnamese.
As the Commission has noted, translators are engaged for face-to-face
services to people when required and provide support; for example, at
immigration detention consultative meetings if needed.
In addition, a number of DSP staff onsite are bilingual and provide informal
interpreting services.
Given the shortage of interpreters accredited by the National Accreditation
Authority for Translators and Interpreters (NAATI), it would be an inappropriate
use of scarce resources to maintain a standby presence throughout the network
for all language groups. However, reflecting the significant Indonesian caseload
at Northern IDC, the centre has one fulltime on-site Bahasa Indonesian
interpreter who is employed by the DSP. Other interpreters are hired on an
as-needs basis.
Although the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners’ Standards For Health Services in Australian IDCs does not require
face-to-face interpreters during health and mental health appointments, the
Health Service Providers, PSS and IHMS provide face-to-face interpreting
services on request from a person or when a health professional deems it
necessary. In all other cases PSS and IHMS organise telephone interpreters
through TIS.
(b) Translation of documents
official letters and documents provided to a detainee are in a language the
detainee can understand. Where this is not possible, the detainee should be
offered the assistance of a face-to-face or telephone interpreter to translate
the contents of the letter or document.
All DIAC and GSL documents provided
or displayed in immigration detention facilities should be translated into the
main languages spoken by the detainee population. DIAC and GSL should coordinate
at a national level to ensure this takes place. This should include request and
complaint forms, induction materials, the menu and the program of recreational
and educational
activities.[22]
As part of DIAC’s duty of care and natural
justice obligations, people in immigration detention are provided with current,
accurate and comprehensive information relevant to their detention in a language
and in terms they can understand.
DIAC and its service providers work with interpreters to facilitate
communication with people in immigration detention who may not be proficient in
English and produce and/or disseminate information about services, policies and
issues regarding immigration detention in English and other relevant languages
where feasible. Written information is made available in other languages, as
appropriate.
When facilitating interpreting services, care is taken to ensure where
possible that the interpreter is acceptable to the person in immigration
detention (particularly for gender and ethnic preference).
Interpreting services are provided in the first instance by the DIAC’s
TIS. Interpreters and translators are NAATI-accredited and bound by the
Australian Institute of Interpreters and Translators (AUSIT) professional code
of ethics.
These services are also available to visitors of people in immigration
detention, as well as to external stakeholders such as the Australian Red Cross
to facilitate communication with people in community detention.
A nationally coordinated approach to the comprehensive translation of
relevant detention documents and information tools between DIAC and the DSP
remains to be developed. The Commission’s recommendations will be taken
into account on this issue.
10.11 Visitors’ facilities
facilities for detainees to meet with visitors. These should include indoor and
outdoor areas. Rooms should be available for private visits. The visitors’
areas should be safe, hospitable and appropriate for children. This is a
particular concern at Villawood IDC and the Perth IDC.
DIAC should ensure
that the interview rooms at all IDCs are private and soundproofed. This is a
particular concern at Villawood IDC and Maribyrnong
IDC.[23]
Visits from family, friends and professional
advisers are an important right for people in immigration detention and
essential to their well-being. Where possible the Department seeks to provide
indoor and outdoor accommodation that promotes meaningful interactions with
visitors, allows for social activities and sharing of meals, and supports
religious and other professional visits.
Improvement works to the visits area in Stage1 of Villawood will be
undertaken early in 2009 and will include the refurbishment and re-planning of
the existing spaces to include snack making facilities and lounge areas,
re-landscaping of the visits courtyard and the provision of disabled access.
The existing Stage 2 and 3 visits facility at VIDC consists of a large open
sided shelter and some outdoor furniture, pergolas, play equipment and vending
machines. Funding is approved for an all-weather visits facility at Stage 2 and
Stage 3 and improvements to the interview rooms. These improvements will be
carried out during 2009. The visits arrangements may require changes in the
future due to the future redevelopment plans for Villawood and the facilities
may be interim or relocatable.
Interview rooms in Villawood’s Stage 2 are being redesigned as part of
the interim visits improvements during 2009. An interview room is being
provided at the new visits works in Stage1. Other interview rooms will be
assessed as part of the 2009 maintenance plans.
The multi-purpose room at Perth IDC serves as the visits area. The number of
people detained in Perth has been low in recent years and a flexible approach is
taken to make best use of the facility. Refurbishments will provide improved
multi-purpose living and dining rooms and outdoor areas that will complement the
centre when used by visitors.
The interview rooms in Maribyrnong are constructed from masonry walls and
solid doors. The sound resistance will be checked and enhanced as part of the
2009 maintenance arrangements.
10.12 Food
(a) Food variety and opportunities for self-catering
provide people in IDCs with greater choice over what they eat, and more
opportunities to prepare their own food if they wish to do so. This could
include more cooking classes, more BBQs and occasional take-away food nights.
DIAC should also consider including more self-catering facilities at the IDCs.
This could include kitchenette facilities with cooking equipment in common
areas, or activities kitchens (similar to the activities kitchen that previously
A variety of food options and preparation methods
are provided across the detention network, dependent on the number and mix of
the people in the immigration detention population at each facility. People in
immigration detention with special dietary needs due to either religious,
cultural, disease or allergies are served appropriately.
People participating in immigration detention consultative meetings at
facilities provide an opportunity to request changes to the menus. This is,
nevertheless, limited by the requirement to:
- abide by food preparation regulations
- ensure food is nutritionally adequate for health and well-being and
- is dietary specific for cultural and medical reasons.
In IDCs bread and condiments are available in activities rooms so
that people in immigration detention can prepare their own snacks between meals.
With the introduction of IRH in Sydney and Perth, people in IRH are able to go
shopping and prepare their own meals.
Melbourne allows some opportunity for people in ITA to self-cater as well as
have take-away meals.
Detention Policy Section is currently drafting instructional materials for
use by Departmental and DSP staff working in immigration detention facilities
which will provide greater guidance on appropriate dietary requirements, also in
the light of this recommendation.
(b) Special dietary needs
appropriate facilities, and follow necessary kitchen practices, to provide meals
and snacks to any detainees who wish to be provided with halal
food.[26]
Halal food is available in all facilities. The
kitchens have been certified by local authorities in each state. Kitchens are
also able to accommodate other dietary needs as required.
10.13 Detainees whose visas have been cancelled
under
section 501
the Migration Act as a matter of priority, with the aim of excluding long-term
permanent residents from the provision.
DIAC and GSL should ensure that risk
assessments for the purposes of client placement and external excursions are
determined on a case by case basis through an assessment of the
individual’s history and circumstances; they should not be based on the
fact that an individual’s visa has been cancelled under section 501 of the
Migration Act. The reasons for the outcome of the assessment should be clearly
communicated to the detainee.[27]
DIAC is currently reviewing the policy framework
applied to section 501 of the Act, including for the management of long-term
residents and those who arrived in Australia as minors.
Risk assessments in immigration detention are determined on a case by case
basis and taking into account by a person’s previous history. People
often have their risk level changed depending on their behaviour within the
centres. Risk assessments are available to people on request.
A large number of excursions are facilitated for people in immigration
detention, including those who have had their visas cancelled under section 501
of the Act. People in immigration detention can request an excursion, including
people who have had a visa cancelled under character grounds. DIAC policy and
procedures state that the DSP and the department will ensure that evaluation of
the request is progressed quickly.
Excursion requests are considered in relation to necessary and current risk
assessments on case-by-case basis.
11 Mainland Immigration Detention Centres: specific concerns
11.1 Villawood IDC
(a) Stage 1
should be undertaken as a matter of priority. This should include the demolition
of Stage 1 as a matter of urgency, and its replacement with a new facility. This
is subject to there being a continuing need for such a facility, given the
Government’s stated intention to detain people in IDCs only as a last
resort.[28]
The comments on VIDC infrastructure are
acknowledged and the Department welcomes the Commission’s continued
involvement with the current and future developments. Please see comments above
in response to recommendation 10.1.
(b) Other concerns
SASH observation
rooms[29]
The comments made about Suicide and Self Harm (SASH) would benefit from
further dialogue with the Department. SASH observation rooms are a procedure
for dealing with a particular set of behaviours. The current interim works at
Villawood seek to reduce the need for SASH observation rooms and deliver more
effective and humane services to people in the centre. Refurbishment works at
Villawood, including those in Stage 1, are interim steps towards a better
designed centre.
Management Support Unit
(MSU)[30]
The refurbishment of the current MSU facility provides for a number of
semi-independent units. The design proposes to provide specialist care
accommodation that will be separate from other accommodation, but may be opened
and integrated as a part of redeveloped Villawood in the future. DIAC invites
the Commission to inspect the plans and construction during early 2009.
External
excursions[31]
There has been a progressive increase in the number and frequency of
organised group external excursions from VIDC over the past twelve months.
Excursions have also been progressively expanded to include people classified
across the range of risk levels. Please see comments above in response to
recommendation 10.6.
Violent
incidents[32]
The VIDC continues to successfully manage a substantial number of people with
very serious histories of violence. Since the Commission’s visit to VIDC
in June 2008, it has been noted that there has been a reduction in the number
and frequency of incidents of violence between people in immigration detention
at that centre.
Incidents of violence between people in immigration detention are
automatically referred to the New South Wales (NSW) Police, who routinely attend
the centre. The relationship between NSW Police and local DIAC staff is strong
and is expected to be formalised shortly, with the signing of a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) with both NSW Police and the Australian Federal Police
(AFP) for the provision of police services at VIDC. DIAC is pleased that all
parties continue to work in the spirit of the MOU in delivering policing
services to Villawood.
Use of
restraints[33]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.7.
Drug
use[34]
DIAC takes all allegations regarding drug use within Villawood or any other
detention facility seriously and does not sanction the use of illegal drugs in
its immigration detention facilities. While proactive measures such as visitor
screening and detainee monitoring are in place to prevent people in immigration
detention accessing illegal drugs, DIAC acknowledges that detention facilities
are not correctional institutions and it is not appropriate to conduct
overly-intrusive searches of people in immigration detention or visitors.
It is important to note that the population of detention facilities includes
people from prison who have been convicted of serious crimes. A number of those
who come from these institutions may have existing drug problems. In VIDC and
MIDC access is provided to a methadone treatment program supervised by trained
doctors.
There have been past allegations of drug use at VIDC. In April
2006, the department was made aware of allegations in relation to the
availability of illicit drugs within VIDC. An independent investigation of
these allegations was immediately arranged and commenced. The independent
investigator reported findings to the Department on 13 June 2006.
Findings from that report included that the DSP had a range of strategies and
operational procedures in place that were designed to deter and prevent the
entry of illicit drugs into the facility; It also found that DSP staff were
trained in the relevant operational procedures and management systems to ensure
effective deterrence and prevention of entry of illicit drugs into VIDC; and
that at the time of the report and on the available evidence, it could be
concluded that illicit drugs were not readily available at VIDC.
Similarly, allegations regarding drug use within Villawood raised in July
2008 were promptly referred to the NSW Police. The Police have concluded their
investigation into these recent allegations. No evidence was found to suggest
that there was an ongoing problem with drug use at VIDC.
DIAC has recently requested the assistance of the Australian Federal Police
in sourcing an appropriate body to assist in reviewing existing policies and
procedures relating to the prevention of entry of illicit substances to the
centre. A reviewer (from the NSW Department of Corrective Services) has
been recommended, terms of reference drafted and the negotiations are ongoing
with the reviewer. It is expected that the review will commence early in
2009.
Interpreters[35]
There is a diverse group of people in the centre and at present DIAC does not
consider that there is a need for an on-site interpreter to cater for a specific
language group or groups.
Please see general comments above in response to recommendation 10.10.
activities[36]
The provision of recreational activities is the responsibility of the DSP.
People from all stages who are detained in Villawood have access to the
soccer field located in Stage 3, including people from Stage 1. There is a wide
range of recreational activities made available for people accommodated at VIDC.
There is also a range of external excursions which may include swimming and
access to cinema and other recreation activities.
activities[37]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.5.
Library
facilities[38]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.4(b).
facilities[39]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.11.
rooms[40]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.11.
DIAC is fully satisfied that Halal food preparation practices are being
followed. Please see general comments above in response to recommendation
10.12
11.2 Perth IDC
(a) Infrastructure and facilities
should be undertaken as a matter of priority. This should ensure that detainees
are provided with access to an outdoor grassy area for sport and recreation,
dedicated classroom space for educational activities, space that can be used for
religious purposes, and appropriate visitors’ facilities.
have regular access to organised sporting activities, such as soccer, outside
the detention centre.
privacy and protection from the weather.
Perth IDC.[42]
Please see comments above in response to
recommendations 10.1 (redevelopment), 10.4(a) (courtyard), 10.4(c) (gym), 10.8
(internet access) and 10.11 (visits).
People at Perth IDC can request access to sporting activities at any time.
Group activities will resume after the centre is redeveloped.
(b) Other concerns
External
excursions[43]
Group excursions from Perth IDC have not been organised recently because the
population within the centre is quite low during the refurbishments. However,
it is expected that group excursions will resume after completion of the works.
Please see general comments above in response to recommendation 10.6.
restraints[44]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.7.
translation[45]
Please see general comments above in response to recommendation 10.10.
Posters are displayed throughout Perth IDC explaining how to use the TIS.
People in Perth IDC are free to request a TIS interpreter to translate the
contents of letters or documents for them at any time. When a large proportion
of people in Perth IDC is identified as speaking a particular language,
translated forms and other material are made available in that language.
As the Commission has noted, translators are engaged for face-to-face
services when required, for example, to assist at immigration detention
consultative meetings. Given the shortage of interpreters accredited by NAATI,
it is not feasible to maintain a standby presence throughout for all language
groups.
As the Commission also notes that people entering Perth IDC are given a small
card that they can show to a detention officer to indicate they need an
interpreter.
sensitivity[46]
All staff members in the Perth IDC have received cultural sensitivity
training. People are encouraged to bring any concerns they may have about
culturally inappropriate behaviour to DIAC’s attention at any time.
11.3 Maribyrnong IDC
(a) Infrastructure and facilities
Maribyrnong IDC are private and soundproofed.
a space which can be used for religious purposes.
detainees are provided with adequate access to open grassy space for sport and
recreation. In the meantime, DIAC and GSL should ensure that detainees at
Maribyrnong IDC have regular access to organised sporting activities, such as
soccer, outside the detention centre.
adequate privacy and protection from the
weather.[47]
Please see comments above in response to 10.11
(visitor’s facilities).
Areas for pastoral care including confession are available in the visits area
and larger areas for larger religious services can be booked by prior
arrangement. DIAC notes that people consulted at a bi-monthly client
consultative meeting held in November 2008 indicated their preference to
practice religion in the privacy of their own rooms. A further group
consultation will be undertaken in future to assess if a need for a
dedicated religious room is needed.
The centre does not have enough space to establish a large grassed area,
however people have access to some sporting activities, in particular badminton
and tennis, and excursions for sporting activities can be requested at any
time.
Please see comments above in response to 10.4(c) (gym).
(b) Other concerns
External
excursions[48]
DIAC actively facilitates excursions for people in MIDC wherever possible.
MIDC welcomes and will facilitate home visits if requests are made. Small
groups, where people have been identified as low risk, have in the past been
able to participate in external excursions. The DSP has also confirmed that on
occasions, family and friends of people undertaking such excursions meet them at
the venue, and there is no objection raised to this occurring.
Please see general comments above in response to recommendation 10.6.
incidents[49]
DIAC is negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Victorian
Police for the provision of police services at MIDC. The negotiations are at an
advanced stage and DIAC is working closely with the Victorian Police to ensure
the MOU is finalised as soon as possible. Any incident that occurs at MIDC that
involves assault, criminal damage or similar is automatically reported to the
Victorian Police by the DSP. In the spirit of the MOU, the Victorian Police
attends incidents at MIDC as required. It is then a matter for the Police to
determine if charges will be laid, with DIAC monitoring the outcome of these
referrals.
DIAC is fully satisfied that Halal food preparation practices are being
followed. Please see general comments above in response to recommendation
10.12.
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.4(b).
11.4 Northern IDC
(a) Infrastructure and physical environment
wire fencing at the Northern IDC. This would be in line with the principle
contained in the DIAC Standards that security systems at all detention
facilities should be as unobtrusive as
possible.[52]
DIAC should ensure
that detainees at the Northern IDC are provided with adequate access to an open
grassy space for sport and recreation. The Commission encourages DIAC to
implement water mitigation measures at the Northern IDC as soon as
possible.[53]
notes that the Commission considers Northern IDC ‘feels less restrictive
than the other mainland detention
centres...’[54] As Northern
IDC is located on an Australian Defence Force base and Defence Force families
reside nearby, any changes in the fencing arrangements would need to be approved
by Defence. Defence has indicated that they do not wish the fences to be
removed.
response to recommendation 10.4, water mitigation works have started and once
completed it will be possible to establish open grassy space.
(b) Other concerns
Educational
programs[55]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.5.
access[56]
Please see comments above in response to recommendation 10.8.Usage will
continue to be monitored and if additional needs are identified then more
internet stations will be ordered.
DIAC is fully satisfied that Halal food preparation practices are being
followed. Please see general comments above in response to recommendation
10.12.
excursions[58]
While people are welcome to request home visits or individual excursions, as
noted by the Commission home visits from Northern IDC are quite rare because
very few people have family or homes in Darwin. Please see general comments
above in response to recommendation 10.6.
(c) Concerns relating to ‘illegal foreign fisher’
detainees[59]
DIAC understands that the Australian Customs Service and the Australian
Fisheries Management Authority will respond to the Commission’s concerns
on this matter.
The immigration detention network comprises of a range of placement options
for person in immigration detention. Under the Act, the current placement
options for persons detained include immigration detention centres (IDCs),
immigration residential housing (IRH), immigration transit accommodation (ITA),
alternative places of detention and community detention (residential
determination).
While alternative detention (IRH/ITA accommodation) and community detention
remain “immigration detention” in a legislative sense and still
requires a level of security and restriction of liberty (as acknowledged by the
Commission), it is the Department’s view that these alternatives are less
intrusive than other detention options. As such, DIAC considers use of these
facilities always preferable to accommodation in IDCs where an evaluation of a
person’s needs and the risk they pose to the community deems it
appropriate.
The number of persons in each facility on 12 December 2008 were:
• immigration detention centres 243
persons
• immigration residential housing
13
• immigration transit accommodation
21
• alternative places of detention 114
• community detention 59
Under the Government’s Key Immigration Detention Values,
- children, including juvenile foreign fishers and, where possible,
their families, will not be detained in an Immigration Detention Centre (IDC)
(Value 3)
- detention that is indefinite or otherwise arbitrary is not
acceptable and the length and conditions of detention, including the
appropriateness of both the accommodation and the services provided, would be
subject to regular review (Value 4) and
- detention in IDCs is only to be used as a last resort and for the
shortest practicable time (Value 5)
As part of the New Directions in Detention reforms, and
particularly reflecting the Key Immigration Detention Values above, the
framework and use of immigration detention infrastructure is currently under
DIAC’s active consideration. Issues in relation to preferred
infrastructure options for contemporary immigration detention also form part of
the Terms of Reference of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration (JSCM) and
it is expected that the Committee’s recommendations will further inform
future directions in the usage of infrastructure usage.
In light of the New Directions in Detention reforms, and the
Government’s Key Immigration Detention Values, DIAC is seeking to make
greater utilisation of alternatives to IDCs. In particular, DIAC is increasing
the placement of people in lower risk facilities such as IRH and ITA rather than
placement in IDCs.
With respect to short-term detention options, DIAC’s policy remains
that people should normally be accommodated in ITA for no longer than seven
days. However, this policy is presently being reviewed in light of the
Government’s New Directions in Detention reforms, recent operational
requirements which necessitated placement of up to 21 days duration, and with a
view to making better use of these facilities. As part of this review, and in
consideration of the potential for shifting the use of these facilities, DIAC
will give active consideration to the Commission’s recommendations in
relation to the services provided at these facilities (such as recreation,
education, meals, health, excursions) if it is decided to detain people in an
ITA for longer than seven days.
As the comments below indicate DIAC has already begin to expand and improve
the services provided to people in IRH facilities. DIAC will continue to
consider and act on the Commission’s recommendations in relation to the
services provided in IRH.
Similarly, in making greater use of community detention options, DIAC is
considering how best to support low-risk people in the community, who would have
previously been placed in an IDC. Community Detention is a useful way of
provide a less restrictive form of detention for some unlawful non citizens and
while its use is growing, it is important to reflect the intention that where
possible a person’s immigration status should be resolved as quickly as
practicable.
A further expression of such shifting infrastructure usage is that families
are sometimes accommodated for short periods in IRH/ITA while community
detention is being sought. In accordance with the Key Immigration Detention
Value that children will not be held in immigration detention centres, placement
of children and their families in community detention remains the priority.
Where placement of minors in a IRH or ITA facility occurs, one of the
considerations is that the environment is appropriate and family-friendly and is
preferable to alternative temporary detention in commercial establishments in
the community, which require more intrusive levels of supervision.
As indicated above, in reforming the immigration detention framework to
reflect the Government’s New Directions in Detention policy and Key
Immigration Detention Values, it is the Minister’s intention to initially
implement administrative and regulatory reform and then pursue possible
legislative changes. DIAC undertakes to continue to consult with the Commission
in progressing policy development in these areas and prior to embarking on
possible legislative changes relating to the framework and use of immigration
detention infrastructure.
12.1 Immigration Residential Housing
(a) Sydney Immigration Residential Housing
alternative to detaining people at the Villawood
IDC.[60]
DIAC endeavours to make the best possible use of SIRH and readily utilises
this facility for all people where an evaluation of their needs and the risk
they pose to the community deems it appropriate. There are at times operational
needs that prevent the IRH being utilised to its maximum capacity. For example,
it is necessary to maintain a contingency capacity to accommodate situations
such as a family arriving at an airport and claiming protection upon arrival,
being refused entry and therefore detained.
All people subject to immigration detention are evaluated for placement after
consideration of health risks, gender considerations, disabilities, safety and
security concerns. Whether any particular placement option is appropriate is a
question that is specific to the various risk factors involved in each
particular set of circumstances. Every person that is detained by the
department in Sydney has a client placement assessment which considers whether
they should be accommodated in SIRH, VIDC or community detention. Regular
reviews of people’s circumstances, needs and risk profiles often sees
people transferred from VIDC to the SIRH.
excursions[61]
frequency of recreational excursions for detainees.
There has been a progressive increase in the number and frequency of
organised group external excursions from SIRH over the past twelve months.
Generally, if the DSP is given enough lead time there is very little restriction
in relation to request for excursions. Please see comments above in response to
recommendation 10.6.
children[62]
The family referred to in the Commission’s report was moved from SIRH
soon after the Commission’s visit. The delay in placing the family in
community detention was caused by difficulties in locating appropriate
accommodation that was acceptable to the family.
In line with the Government’s New Directions in Detention policy, all
families in the SIRH are given high priority for rapid resolution of their
immigration status or referral for a residence determination (community
detention) consideration.
Please also see general comments above under 12, Introductory comments.
option of accessing health and mental health staff and services onsite.
The IRH health care model is community based, where people are able to access
all medical services to a standard normally available to Australians living in
larger cities.
New arrangements are being put in place with DIAC’s Health Services
Providers to facilitate a registered nurse from the Villawood IDC to provide
on-site services to people at the SIRH. These arrangements are still being
finalised. From November 2008, onsite psychology and counselling services
became available to people at the SIRH.
activities[64]
Sydney IRH are provided with regular access to recreational and educational
activities.
All people accommodated in IRH have access to recreational and educational
activities. DIAC constantly reviews the range and scope of these activities and
also takes steps to ensure that activities are appropriate to each
individual’s needs. Two external groups provide program assistance in the
SIRH. The Baptist Church offers singing and craft activities and the Australian
League of Immigration Volunteers offer language learning activities. GSL also
offer computer courses, sewing activities, painting and craft activities, table
tennis, board game activities, client and staff barbecues and sporting
activities including cricket, soccer and basket ball. Self-paced English
language-learning resources are also available.
(b) Perth Immigration Residential Housing
alternative to detaining people at the Perth
IDC.[65]
Utilising the least restrictive place of detention is the driving factor for
placement decisions. DIAC endeavours to make the best possible use of Perth IRH
and readily utilises this facility for all people where an evaluation of their
needs and the risk they pose to the community deems it appropriate. However,
the Perth IRH has limited capacity, with the ability to house twelve clients
when used to its optimal occupancy. This capacity is reduced if family groups,
single females, or minors are accommodated. Therefore, at times, such as when
DIAC conducts compliance field operations, the additional capacity provided by
the Perth IDC is required. There are also times when Perth IDC is required to
be utilised for cases where a risk assessment has shown that the Perth IRH is an
unsuitable option.
All people subject to immigration detention are evaluated for placement after
consideration of health risks, gender considerations, disabilities, safety and
security concerns. Whether any particular placement option is appropriate is a
question that is specific to the various risk factors involved in each
particular set of circumstances. Every person that is detained by the
department in Perth has a client placement assessment which considers whether
they should be accommodated in Perth IRH, Perth IDC or community detention.
Regular reviews of people’s circumstances, needs and risk profile often
sees people transferred from the Perth IDC to the IRH.
Interpreter services are provided on an ad hoc basis and are dependent
on the needs of the people. The high turnover and variety of people at Perth
IRH has not to date created a demand for permanent on-site interpreters.
Please see general comments above in response to recommendation 10.10.
children[67]
DIAC notes that the Commission does not have any major issues in relation to
the Perth IRH. The facility offers comfortable accommodation and has a regular
activities and excursion schedule. While the Perth IRH has been used to
accommodate families with children for short periods of time, in line with the
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy, all families in the Perth
IRH are given high priority for rapid resolution of their immigration status or
referral for a residence determination (community detention) consideration.
Please also see general comments above under 12, Introductory comments.
option of accessing health and mental health staff and services onsite. [68]
As noted above, the IRH health care model is community based, where people
are able to access all medical services to a standard normally available to
Australians living in larger cities.
New arrangements are being put in place with DIAC’s Health Services
Providers to facilitate a registered nurse from the Perth IDC to provide on-site
services to people at the Perth IRH. These arrangements are still being
finalised. From November 2008, onsite psychology and counselling services
became available to people accommodated at the Perth IRH.
12.2 Immigration transit
accommodation
people for longer than seven days, as an alternative to detaining them in an
IDC, DIAC should provide detainees with access to external excursions, organised
recreational and educational activities, and health and mental health services,
as appropriate.[69]
Please see general comments above under 12, Introductory comments.
(a) Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation
materials[70]
An Induction booklet for people at the ITA has been written and approved. It
is currently being provided in English, and is in the process of being
translated into Arabic, Cantonese, Japanese, Bahasa Malaysia, Mandarin, Tamil,
Thai and Vietnamese.
Posters in a number of languages are displayed at the BITA advising how to
access TIS. People entering BITA are given a small card that they can show to
detention officers or anyone else to indicate they need an interpreter in their
specific language.
Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation
Complaint and request forms are now freely available at the BITA and are
provided in Arabic, English, Farsi, Indonesian, Korean, Bahasa Malaysia and
Mandarin.
A complaints box is located in the common room. Additional boxes have been
ordered and will be installed in each of the three accommodation blocks.
As the Commission has noted, a Hospitality and Activities Coordinator who is
a qualified chef started work at the BITA in September and freshly-cooked
meals are now prepared on site. Every effort is made to accommodate
peoples’ dietary needs and preferences.
Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation
Access to landline telephones and the internet is no longer restricted for
medium and high-risk clients at the BITA. DIAC is monitoring the DSP to ensure
such restrictions are not re-introduced.
Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation
children[74]
The BITA is suitable for families with children for short stays. One
unaccompanied 15-year-old minor stayed at the BITA from 28 October to
12 November 2008, during which time regular activities, excursions and
access to the internet and telephone were arranged for the minor. After
consultation with relevant welfare agencies and referral to an Immigration
Advice and Application Scheme provider, the minor was placed on a Bridging Visa
E pending the outcome of an application for protection, and is living with a
family in Brisbane that has been assessed as suitable by the Queensland
Department of Child Safety. Please see general comments above under 12,
Introductory comments.
(b) Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation
services[75]
Health Services at the MITA are provided by a registered nurse from the MIDC,
who visits the ITA between Monday and Friday when people are accommodated there.
People in the MITA can also access health services through a community general
practitioner, who makes any necessary referrals to external providers.
As previously advised, placement decisions are made on a case-by-case basis
and physical and/or mental health concerns do not necessarily prevent a person
from being accommodated at the MITA. People with significant physical and/or
medical issues have been accommodated at the MITA, as it can be flexibly
configured to enable the condition of these particular people to be closely
monitored.
Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation
activities[76]
The MITA’s outdoor area has been landscaped, is well furnished and
there is a volleyball court. The outdoor area is suitable for a variety of
recreational and sporting activities.
Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation
children[77]
As noted above the MITA is suitable for families with children for short
stays. One family with a 16-year-old child was accommodated for two days
pending removal from Australia. A mother and two children stayed in the MITA
for a longer period until they were placed in community detention. Please see
general comments above under 12, Introductory comments.
12.3 Community detention
(a) Advantages of community detention
Immigration and Citizenship to make greater use of community detention
arrangements, rather than holding people in immigration detention
facilities.[78]
Please see general comments above under 12,
Introductory comments.
(b) Eligibility criteria
Recommendations: The eligibility criteria for referral for a
Residence Determination should be broadened. In addition to the current
criteria, any person who has been in an immigration detention facility for three
months or more should be able to apply for, or be referred for, a Residence
Determination.
In the meantime, DIAC should ensure that all immigration
detainees who meet one of the current eligibility criteria are referred to the
Minister without delay. In particular, any detainees with significant health or
mental health issues, or with a background of torture or trauma, should be
promptly considered for a Residence
Determination.[79]
Section 197AB of the Act, gives the
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship a non-delegable, non-compellable
power to place persons detained into community detention under a Residence
Determination. The Minister is able to exercise that power if he thinks that it
is in the public interest to do so. The power has been used to place children
and families with children in community detention. It has also been used to
place persons who may have experienced torture and trauma and persons whose
medical condition cannot be properly cared for in a detention centre into
community detention. The Minister has determined that it is in the public
interest to exercise his powers to place people in a residence determination
when the provision of bridging visas has not been appropriate, but where
continued placement in a detention facility is not considered necessary or
appropriate. DIAC accepts the importance of acting quickly when a community
detention placement is being considered and makes every effort to facilitate the
placement.
DIAC’s Health Services Provider (HSP) advises DIAC of any person in
detention who has, or is suspected to have, significant health concerns for
which they believe their condition can be better managed outside of an IDC.
With regard to people in immigration detention who are suspected to have torture
and/or trauma issues, the standard process is that the HSP advises DIAC of this,
and the person is subsequently referred for consideration of Community Detention
as a priority. Delays associated with these referrals usually stem from delays
in obtaining appointments with specialist torture and trauma providers, who
assess people and provide summary reports to assist the referral process. The
procedures around this have recently changed so that referrals can now be made
based solely on written advice from the HSP, rather than waiting for the
specialist report.
policy, without delay, to clarify its requirement that people in community
detention must obtain approval before undertaking unpaid voluntary work. The
policy should be clear and transparent. It should set out: the steps required to
apply for approval; the criteria to be considered in determining whether a
voluntary work placement is ‘suitable’; the type of insurance
coverage required by the organisation; and the timeframe in which requests will
be responded to. DIAC should ensure that all requests are promptly considered
and responded to. Reasons should be provided if the request is denied.
undertaking courses of study that lead to a formal qualification. DIAC should
allow people in community detention to enrol in substantive education courses at
TAFE and other educational or vocational training
institutions.[80]
DIAC recognises the importance of persons in
Community Detention being able to engage in meaningful activities. The
Australian Red Cross, which currently delivers the Community Detention Services,
works with people in community detention to assist them to participate in
activities such as language tuition, community groups and volunteer work. The
formal policy outlining procedures is very close to completion and the
suggestions in the Commission’s report about voluntary work will be
included to make the procedure clear and easily understood.
While DIAC acknowledges the benefit of educational programs to people in
immigration detention there are a number of impediments that generally preclude
these programs being extended to tertiary courses.
Generally, the educational programs accessed by people in immigration
detention are of a short duration, usually up to four months. It is
impracticable for a person in immigration detention who is on a removal pathway
or awaiting the outcome of a visa application or appeal to commence a longer
course of study. Adults may undertake community college or adult education
courses and may obtain a certificate or other accreditation for their
studies.
13 Immigration detention on Christmas Island
on Christmas Island.[81]
The continued use of Christmas Island for the non-statutory processing and
accommodation of people who arrive unauthorised at excised offshore places is a
matter of Government policy.
13.1 Excision and off-shore processing
provisions of the Migration Act relating to excised off-shore places. All
unauthorised arrivals who make claims for asylum should have those claims
assessed through the refugee status determination process on the Australian
mainland.[82]
The retention of the excision of offshore islands and the continued use of
Christmas Island for the non-statutory processing of people who arrive
unauthorised at excised offshore places is a matter of Government policy.
As part of the New Direction in Detention reforms, on 29 July 2008 the
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship Senator Chris Evans announced that
there would be a number of changes to the non-statutory refugee processing
regime on Christmas Island. The non-statutory refugee processing arrangements
have been substantially enhanced to improve transparency and accountability of
the process and to seek to remedy deficiencies previously identified in the
process. As part of these reforms, asylum seekers will receive publicly funded
advice and assistance, access to independent review of unfavourable decisions
and external scrutiny by the Immigration Ombudsman. These measures will build
on strengthened procedural guidance for departmental decision-makers.
These
new processes are supported with additional resources. The Government will
provide $4.2 million over four years (including $0.2 million capital funding in
2008-09) for the establishment and processing of the new arrangements
(particularly for independent advice and assistance and merits review), and
including funding to the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman of $1.0 million
over four years.
Publicly-funded advice and assistance for asylum seekers is being provided on
Christmas Island through the existing contract arrangements between the
Australian Government and ten agencies employing professional migration agents,
under the Immigration Advice and Application Assistance Scheme (IAAAS). This is
the same kind and quality of independent advice and applications assistance that
is afforded to protection visa applicants onshore and ensures no disadvantage to
asylum seekers on Christmas Island when compared with those Protection
applicants on the mainland.
As with task forces assisting asylum seekers on Christmas Island in earlier
years, arrangements are made for IAAAS agents to travel to Christmas Island as a
first priority, with interpreters, and in numbers that match DIAC’s
refugee assessment officer contingent. Agents are invited in numbers sufficient
to permit thorough assistance to each client, allowing for extensive interview
and other contact before lodging statements of claims. IAAAS agents are able to
meet with asylum seekers as soon as possible after the initial entry and
identification interviews have been conducted and after character and health
screening has commenced. Only after clients have been assisted by their IAAAS
agent do they proceed to having their interviews with departmental refugee
assessment officers. In this way, every effort is made to ensure asylum seekers
on Christmas Island have substantially the same publicly-funded professional and
independent support as mainland applicants in making their refugee claims
quickly and comprehensively.
DIAC has established interim arrangements for independent merits review and
is currently working through the development of a longer term review model.
DIAC has been in discussions with the Commonwealth Ombudsman, who has agreed
to take on an oversight role for the non-statutory refugee status assessment and
review processes on Christmas Island. It is envisaged that this oversight role
may include looking at the fairness and efficiency of the non-statutory process,
investigating complaints, examining the timeliness of both the primary and
review processes and the management of vulnerable groups such as children and
disabled asylum seekers.
DIAC continues to work with stakeholders, including
IAAAS providers and representatives of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office
who have already assisted asylum seekers on Christmas Island in 2008, to improve
the non-statutory refugee assessment and independent merits review
procedures.
13.2 Health care for detainees on Christmas
Island[83]
The provision of health services to residents on Christmas Island is the
responsibility of the Attorney-General’s Department (AGD), through the
Indian Ocean Territories Health Services (IOTHS). IOTHS operates a small, 12-bed
Christmas Island hospital, which is staffed by two doctors, several nurses and
allied health professionals.
The provision of health services to people in immigration detention on
Christmas Island is the responsibility of DIAC. IOTHS may provide some health
services to detainees as private patients at Christmas Island Hospital, with
DIAC meeting all costs. In addition to arrangements with AGD and IOTHS, health
services are also provided to detainees by DIAC’s contracted health
services provider, IHMS. Under the Health Care Services Agreement, IHMS employs
two registered nurses at Christmas Island, 7am – 7pm, Monday to Sunday and
according to demand.
Doctors, specialist health care providers and additional nurses may be flown
to Christmas Island when required in line with peoples’ health care
requirements. These additional services are provided by IHMS within one week of
notification.
Patients are treated in line with community standards. If on medical advice
appropriate medical care and support requires that a patient be treated in a
mainland facility, then the patient is moved to mainland Australia.
The department is currently in discussion with the AGD on developing a
Memorandum of Understanding for the provision of specified health services to
people in immigration detention on Christmas Island.
Arrangements with DIAC’s Health Services Providers, PSS and IHMS, allow
scope for psychological and counselling services to be provided to people on
Christmas Island when required.
As an example, with the recent unauthorised boat arrivals, a psychologist was
flown to Christmas Island on two separate occasions, to provide additional
support to the mental health nurse. Following each of the psychologist’s
departures, support continued to be provided via telephone. Additionally, two
torture and trauma specialists from the Association for Services to Torture and
Trauma Survivors have been provided on Christmas Island to assist people
with suspected torture and/or trauma issues.
The department is currently examining ways to improve the communications
infrastructure available to people in immigration detention, their
representatives and DIAC staff on Christmas Island. Once an appropriate way
forward has been identified, access to communication facilities will be greatly
improved.
13.5 Immigration detention facilities on
Christmas Island[85]
Consistent with Government policy, all unauthorised boat arrivals are
detained and processed on Christmas Island while health, identity and security
checks are undertaken.
There are a number of immigration facilities on Christmas Island which
provide maximum flexibility to manage groups of families or individuals with
varying needs. These include:
- The North West Point
- IDC is able to accommodate 400 people with a surge capacity of
800.
- IDC is able to accommodate 400 people with a surge capacity of
- Phosphate Hill
- The Government moved quickly to convert the old Phosphate Hill
facilities on Christmas Island to allow small groups of unauthorised arrivals to
be accommodated.
- The Government moved quickly to convert the old Phosphate Hill
- Construction camp
- There are 300 rooms available at the construction camp that can be
utilised in a variety of configurations dependent on client make-up and
- There are 300 rooms available at the construction camp that can be
- Community detention
- There are a number of duplexes available for family groups plus a
number of self contained units available for use in the community detention
context.
- There are a number of duplexes available for family groups plus a
Accommodation arrangements are determined by the number
of arrivals as well as the need to separate groups for processing, public health
management, gender, culture and other reasons.
In line with the government's New Directions in Detention once health,
identity and security checks have been successfully completed people can be
placed into the community while their immigration status is resolved. While
living in community detention arrangements on Christmas Island, people are
supported by key service providers to access community-based services, programs
and activities.
To address long-term infrastructure issues, the Government is working in
close consultation with the community to identify suitable options within the
Strategic Land Use Plan for Christmas Island.
13.5 Immigration detention facilities on Christmas Island
hold people in immigration
detention.[86]
The Australian Government has clearly articulated its intention to retain the
new Christmas Island IDC at North West Point as part of Australia’s
immigration detention network.
The Government’s policy was to open the new facility when numbers and
separation arrangements required it. On 19 December 2008, the Minister for
Immigration and Citizenship decided to open the centre to house the adult male
passengers and crew from a vessel intercepted north-east of Darwin on
16 December 2008.
Ongoing use of the Christmas Island IDC will depend on the client population
and arrangements required. Children, families and women will not be
accommodated in the North West Point facility, consistent with the
Government’s policy that no child will reside in an IDC.
DIAC accepts that placing persons in community detention on Christmas Island
has some unique local problems. DIAC has placed two senior officers from
National Office on the island to work with the Australian Red Cross and local
stakeholders to resolve issues. Buses have been purchased which will assist in
transportation problems and Red Cross staff numbers have been increased, with an
additional Red Cross worker going to the island over the school holiday period
to organise activities. Red Cross will maintain a permanent presence on the
island in the foreseeable future. Similarly, Departmental staff with specific
responsibilities for community detention will be on the island.
14 Children in immigration detention
protects the human rights of all children. Human rights of particular importance
for children subject to immigration detention include the following:
14.1 Overarching
principles[89]
- The best interests of the child should be a primary consideration in all
actions concerning
children.[90]
- The detention of a child should be used only as a measure of last resort
and for the shortest appropriate period of time. Children must not be deprived
of their liberty unlawfully or
arbitrarily.[91]
- No child should be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment.[92]
- Children in detention have the right to be treated with humanity and
respect for their inherent
dignity.[93]
- Children in detention must be able to challenge the legality of their
detention before a court or other competent, independent and impartial
authority.[94]
- Children have the right to enjoy, to the maximum extent possible,
development and recovery from past
trauma.[95]
- Asylum-seeking and refugee children are entitled to appropriate protection
and assistance.[96]
- Children have a right to
non-discrimination.[97]
14.2 Lack of legal protections for children
Recommendation: The Australian Government should implement in full
the recommendations made by the Commission in the report of its national inquiry
into children in immigration detention, A last
resort?[9] These include the
following:
Australia's immigration detention laws should be amended, as a
matter of urgency, to comply with the Convention on the Rights of the
Child. In particular, the new laws should incorporate the following
minimum features:
- There should be a presumption against the detention of children for
immigration purposes.
- A court or independent tribunal should assess whether there is a need to
detain children for immigration purposes within 72 hours of any initial
detention (for example for the purposes of health, identity or security checks).
- There should be prompt and periodic review by a court of the legality of
continuing detention of children for immigration purposes.
- All courts and independent tribunals should be guided by the following
principles:
- detention of children must be a measure of last resort and for the
shortest appropriate period of time
- the best interests of the child must be a primary
consideration
- the preservation of family unity
- special protection and assistance for unaccompanied children.
- detention of children must be a measure of last resort and for the
- Bridging visa regulations for unauthorised arrivals should be amended so as
to provide a readily available mechanism for the release of children and their
parents.[98
as a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, takes its
obligations very seriously. The obligation to treat the best interests of the
child as a primary consideration in all actions concerning children is
reflected in Ministerial Direction 21, issued by the Minister under section 499
of the Migration Act, regarding the exercise of the power to refuse to grant or
to cancel a visa under section 501 of the Act. The obligation is also reflected
in other departmental policy documents guiding the exercise of key discretionary
decisions, and in the guidelines for the exercise of the Minister's personal
public interest powers.
DIAC has also developed policies to ensure that the rights of children are
protected, including a framework which incorporates guiding principles on the
treatment of children. These guidelines reflect the importance of:
- the individual circumstances of a child;
- the contextual environments of children, including family and other
dynamics;
- the best interest and welfare of a child; and
- the departments need to detain only as a last resort.
In 2005, the Migration Act was amended to affirm the principle that
children should only be detained as a last resort. Section 4AA states:
(1) The Parliament affirms as a principle that a minor shall only be detained
as a measure of last resort.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the reference to a minor being
detained does not include a reference to a minor residing at a place in
accordance with a residence determination [Community Detention].
The overall intent of the package of amendments that introduced section 4AA
into the Migration Act was to ensure that the best interests of children were
taken into account and that any alternatives to the detention of children were
considered in administering the relevant provisions.
In July 2008, the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship announced the
Government’s New Directions in Detention policy and Key Immigration
Detention Values. Value 3 extends on the legislative provision in s 4AA and
provides that ‘Children, including juvenile foreign fishers and, where
possible, their families, will not be detained in an IDC’.
As noted above, while prompt placement of children and their families in
community detention remains DIAC’s priority, there will be occasions when
children will be accommodated in low security facilities within the immigration
detention framework, such as immigration residential housing (IRH) and
immigration transit accommodation (ITA). As with other aspects of the broad
reform agenda, DIAC is currently developing policies to better support these
arrangements.
Other Key Immigration Detention Values serve to ensure that children are not
deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. Specifically:
- Value 4 states: ‘Detention that is indefinite or otherwise arbitrary
is not acceptable and the length and conditions of detention, including the
appropriateness of both the accommodation and the services provided, would be
subject to regular review’
- Value 6 states: ‘People in immigration detention will be treated
fairly and reasonably within the law’ and
- Value 7 states: ‘Conditions of detention will ensure the inherent
dignity of the human person.’
As part of the New Direction in Detention reform agenda, DIAC is
improving the transparency and accountability of immigration detention by
ensuring all detention cases, including those involving children, are reviewed
every three months by a senior departmental officer. Additionally, a six-monthly
review of detention placements by the Commonwealth Ombudsman will be
instituted.
All children and their families, or unaccompanied minors, found to be owed
protection obligations by Australia are granted permanent protection visas,
allowing them to live in Australia permanently. They are also entitled to the
full range of government benefits and services.
Bridging visas provide an available mechanism for the release of children
from detention along with their families.
14.3 Lack of legal protections for children
the recommendations made by the Commission in the report of its national inquiry
into children in immigration detention, A last
resort?[9] These include the
following:
Australia's immigration detention laws should be amended, as a
matter of urgency, to comply with the Convention on the Rights of the
Child. In particular, the new laws should incorporate the following
minimum features:
- There should be a presumption against the detention of children for
immigration purposes.
- A court or independent tribunal should assess whether there is a need to
detain children for immigration purposes within 72 hours of any initial
detention (for example for the purposes of health, identity or security checks).
- There should be prompt and periodic review by a court of the legality of
continuing detention of children for immigration purposes.
- All courts and independent tribunals should be guided by the following
principles:
- detention of children must be a measure of last resort and for the
shortest appropriate period of time
- the best interests of the child must be a primary
consideration
- the preservation of family unity
- special protection and assistance for unaccompanied children.
- detention of children must be a measure of last resort and for the
- Bridging visa regulations for unauthorised arrivals should be amended so as
to provide a readily available mechanism for the release of children and their
parents.[99]
As indicated above, in reforming the immigration detention framework to
reflect the Government’s New Directions in Detention policy and Key
Immigration Detention Values, it is the Minister’s intention to initially
implement administrative and regulatory reform and then pursue possible
legislative changes. DIAC undertakes to consider these recommendations and
continue to consult with the Commission in progressing policy development in
these areas and prior to embarking on possible legislative changes.
14.4 Children in IRH and immigration transit accommodation
facility as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of
time. DIAC should consider any less restrictive alternatives that may be
available to an individual child before deciding to place that child in an IRH
or ITA facility. Until the recommendation in section 14.2 of this report is
implemented and a system of independent review is established, the absolute
maximum time of detention in these cases should be four weeks for a child with a
family member, or two weeks for an unaccompanied
child.[100]
Please see general comments above under 12,
Introductory comments, and in response to recommendation 14.2 above.
14.5 Children in alternative places of
detention
on Christmas Island. However, if DIAC intends to continue this practice,
children should be accommodated with their family members in DIAC’s
community based accommodation. They should not be detained at the construction
camp facility, the Phosphate Hill IDC or the new Christmas Island
IDC.[101]
The continued use of Christmas Island for the
non-statutory processing and accommodation of people who arrive unauthorised at
excised offshore places is a matter of Government policy. Further, the
Government’s Key Immigration Detention Values state that all unauthorised
arrivals will be subject to mandatory detention for the management of health,
identity and security risks to the community.
The Immigration Detention Values also specify that ‘Children, including
juvenile foreign fishers and, where possible, their families, will not be
detained in an IDC. Consistent with the Government’s policy, children,
families and women will not be accommodated in the North West Point IDC.
Children on Christmas Island are placed on arrival in alternate places of
detention, such as the construction camp, while health, security and identity
checks are conducted. As soon as these checks are completed the Minister for
Immigration and Citizenship is asked to consider placing the children in
community detention.
DIAC is working with stakeholders on Christmas Island to ensure that children
accommodated there are well cared for and have access to appropriate health,
educational, recreational and support services. All school-aged children attend
local schools. The Attorney-General’s Department, which administers the
Indian Ocean Territories, is cooperating with the department to ensure that
children on Christmas Island are supported with youth workers. DIAC has also
arranged for the Australian Red Cross to deliver a school holiday program of
activities.
14.6 Unaccompanied
minors[102]
recommendation made by the Commission in A last resort? that an
independent guardian should be appointed for unaccompanied children and they
should receive appropriate
support.[103]
DIAC currently works under the legislation of The Immigration
(Guardianship of Children) Act 1946 (IGOC Act). The IGOC Act is the
administrative mechanism by which legal guardianship for certain children
entering Australia is conferred upon the Minister for Immigration and
Citizenship. This means that the Minister as legal guardian of certain children
has the rights and powers that can be exercised by an adult in respect of a
minor.
Section 5 of the IGOC Act empowers the Minister to delegate the guardianship
powers and functions to any officer or authority of the Commonwealth or of any
state or territory department responsible for child welfare. These officers
assume responsibility for unaccompanied minors when such children are placed in
alternate places of detention or community detention.
[1] Ibid,
p.18.
[2] Ibid,
p.19.
[3] Ibid,
p.21.
[4] Ibid,
p.21.
[5] Ibid,
p.23.
[6] Ibid,
p.24.
[7] Ibid,
p.25.
[8] Ibid,
p.25.
[9] Ibid,
p.27.
[10] Ibid,
p.28.
[11] Ibid,
p.30.
[12] Ibid,
p31.
[13] Ibid,
p32.
[14] Ibid,
p32.
[15] Ibid,
p35.
[16] Ibid,
p36.
[17] Ibid,
p37.
[18] Ibid,
p.38.
[19] Ibid,
p.38.
[20] Ibid,
p.39.
[21] Ibid,
p.41.
[22] Ibid,
pp.41-42.
[23] Ibid,
p.43.
[24] In its 2006 inspection
report, the Commission noted that the introduction of an activities kitchen at
Baxter had been highly successful, and recommended that other detention centres
establish similar
facilities.
[25] AHRC, 2008
Immigration Report,
p.44.
[26] Ibid,
p.44.
[27] Ibid,
p.46.
[28] Ibid,
p.47.
[29] Ibid,
p.48.
[30] Ibid,
p.48.
[31] Ibid,
p.48.
[32] Ibid,
p.48.
[33] Ibid,
p.48.
[34] Ibid,
p.48.
[35] Ibid,
p.49.
[36] Ibid,
p.49
[37] Ibid,
p.49.
[38] Ibid,
p.49.
[39] Ibid,
p.49.
[40] Ibid,
p.49.
[41] Ibid,
p.50.
[42] Ibid,
p.51.
[43] Ibid,
p.52.
[44] Ibid,
p.52.
[45] Ibid,
p.52.
[46] Ibid,
p.52.
[47] Ibid,
p.53.
[48] Ibid,
p.54.
[49] Ibid,
p.54.
[50] Ibid,
p.54.
[51] Ibid,
p.54.
[52] See Standards for
design and fit out of immigration detention
facilities.
[53] AHRC, 2008 Immigration Report,
p.55.
[54] Ibid,
p.55.
[55] Ibid,
p.56.
[56] Ibid,
p.56.
[57] Ibid,
p.56.
[58] Ibid,
p.56.
[59] Ibid,
p.57.
[60] Ibid,
p.60.
[61] Ibid,
p.60.
[62] Ibid,
p.60.
[63] Ibid,
p.60.
[64] Ibid,
p.60.
[65] Ibid,
p.61.
[66] Ibid,
p.61
[67] Ibid,
p.62.
[68] Ibid,
p.62.
[69] Ibid,
p.63.
[70] AHRC, 2008
Immigration Report,
p.64.
[71] Ibid,
p.64.
[72] Ibid,
p.64.
[73] Ibid,
p.64.
[74] Ibid,
p.64.
[75] Ibid,
p.65.
[76] Ibid,
p.65.
[77] Ibid,
p.65.
[78] Ibid,
p.67.
[79] Ibid,
p.68.
[80] Ibid,
p.70.
[81] Ibid,
p.71.
[82] Ibid,
p.72.
[83] Ibid,
p.73.
[84] Ibid,
p.73.
[85] Ibid,
p.76.
[86] Ibid,
p.76.
[87] Ibid,
pp.78-79.
[88] Convention on
the Rights of the Child
[89] AHRC, 2008 Immigration Report,
pp.79-80.
[90] Convention on
the Rights of the Child, article
3(1)
[91] Ibid, article
37(b)
[92] Ibid, article
37(c).
[93] Ibid, article
37(a) and article 37(c).
[94] Ibid, article 37(d).
[95] Ibid, article 6(2) and article
39/
[96] Ibid, article
22(1).
[97] Ibid, article
2.
[98] AHRC, 2008 Immigration
Report, p.81.
[99] AHRC, 2008
Immigration Report,
p.81.
[100] Ibid,
p.83.
[101] Ibid,
p.85.
[102] Ibid,
p.86.
[103] Human Rights and
Equal Opportunity Commission, A Last Resort? A summary guide to the National
Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention, 2004, pp. 698-701, 857and
873-877.