Young Sri Lankan widow Ranjini and her two little boys aged six and nine, are trapped. In every sense of the word.
She’s a refugee, granted asylum in Australia in September last year.
Ranjini’s first husband was killed in Sri Lanka in 2006. She and her children arrived in Australia on Christmas Island in 2010 and spent the next two years in detention facilities across Australia.
The two little boys have effectively grown up in detention. In Australia.
But after finally being released into the community in September last year, life for Ranjini and her boys was starting to look hopeful for the first time.
Ranjini re-married in a colourful ceremony last month. And this year she sent her kids to Mill Park Primary School in Victoria. Everything was finally coming together.
She wasn’t expecting what came next. Immigration officials asked her and her sons for a chat where they were told Ranjini had been given an ‘adverse’ security assessment by the nation’s intelligence arm the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO).
These checks rely on factors as vague as ‘threats to integrity of borders‘ to evidence of terrorist involvement. However, most ASIO security checks appear to come back ‘adverse’ due to a connection, however loose, to the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a militant group fighting for an independent nation for Tamil people.
Ranjini may have had family involved in the Tamil group. Or, she may not have. The point is, we’ll never know.
Five minutes after being told of her adverse check, Ranjini and her children were taken away. Ranjini’s husband Ganesh tells the story:
“In the meeting, they said that Ranjini has got an adverse security assessment. I was allowed only five minutes to chat with them and they were taken away,” he said.
“We were happy and the kids were even happier … we wanted to start new life with hope. But now we are shocked…We are separated. There has been too much pain before. Are we going to be put through the same pain in Australia as well?”
The short answer: most likely.
You see, Ranjini and her sons now exist in a state of absolute limbo. She cannot be sent ‘home’ to Sri Lanka because she has been granted refugee status. But she cannot stay in the Australian community either. Nor is it likely any other country will take her, given she has a negative security assessment.
Here’s the kicker: there is nothing she can do about any of it. Ranjini and others like her cannot appeal their assessments. ASIO doesn’t tell them or anyone else what it was exactly that led them to find against her. It’s a mystery to Ranjini and it would be a mystery to a court as well, if she were allowed to take it that far.
And ASIO has been wrong before. In 2004, for example, ASIO was forced to pay around $200 000 compensation to a refugee who had been locked up for two years, having been falsely classified as a national security risk.
Villawood Detention Centre has become her new ‘home’ … and it may be for the rest of her and her children’s lives.
Ganesh, who has to remain in Melbourne for an income, cannot easily visit his wife in the Sydney detention centre.
Human rights advocate and barrister Julian Burnside has worked on these exact cases and said the system that created them was ‘insane’.
“To lock someone up for what may be the rest of their life is unconscionable to the extent that you simply cannot square it with the tone of Australian democracy,” he said.
“In another case for the non-citizen I challenged the ASIO negative security check on judicial review in Federal Court. The people involved swore they had never done anything wrong or anything that might have flagged the attention of ASIO.
“But ASIOs argument to the court was that the judge cannot know why they made their security assessment, because that cannot be released, and therefore the judge cannot find the security assessment to be wrong and the judge had to agree.
“It is horrifying. I’ve had to tell these people what has happened but I can’t tell them it makes sense because it doesn’t make sense to me. The refugees I explain this to are obviously very distressed at the prospect.
“For asylum seekers who come by boat there is the added sting of an added element to these security checks and that is ‘may have had involvement in or connection to people smuggling’. Now, this could be your father but that’s still enough to give you a negative security cross.
“Now, I understand the importance of national security and I know we do not want terrorists in this country. I understand all that, but at some point we have to recognise that something in this system has gone grossly wrong.
“At the very least changes need to be made so that anyone who has a negative security check has the right to be represented by responsible counsel and the right to know the basis of that security check as long as counsel never shows it to anyone else.
“The whole country needs to understand what is going on here and they need to ask themselves: is this the country that we want to be?”
The Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s official position is that ‘third country options’ will be sought for these refugees living in limbo. But as Julian Burnside asked: ‘who would take them’?
There are currently 47, including Ranjini, in detention awaiting a trial that will never come.
As GetUp noted, one of them attempted suicide last week. The activist organisation has started a campaign to change the ‘no trial, no appeal’ status of refugees found to have negative security checks.
Deputy Director Sam Mclean said it was time the Government acted on its own recommendations.
“We have been keeping an eye on this issue since a parliamentary inquiry forwarded recommendations for ASIO decisions of this type to be appeal-able and reviewable. This is a classic example of exactly why that needs to happen,” he said.
GetUp’s campaign calling on Attorney-General Nicola Roxon for action was so popular last night the site began to crash.
You can sign the petition here, if you think this shouldn’t be happening in 2012.
You can contact the Prime Minister here. Or contact Attorney-General Nicola Roxon here.
This story was originally reported by Steve Cannane, for ABC’s Lateline.







Comments
107 Comments so far
Why cannot judges be given access to the security assessments, and then allowed to make their own decisions whilst not revealing explicit details they have seen?
Judges are supposed to be an important part of our Australian democracy.
loading...
This is just awful, & I am doing something about it & you can too. I’m e-mailing Nicola Roxon & tweeting Chris Bowen everyday! Why let this just slip under the rug like the 47 others, let’s keep keep it current & try for change… I belive every human has the right to appeal!
loading...
They are damned if they do damned if they don’t, Asio have clearly found a reason to find this woman a risk factor, so they acted. What if they didn’t act on these 47 people and something terrible happened, then everyone would say why didn’t Asio act!
I agree no right to appeal is horrible, but like you said there are 47 other individuals in the same position, I feel like this is only highlighted due to her sex and motherhood.
loading...
I am not an expert in immigration issues. I’ve never heard of this woman but I would suggest that you should ask for further information before making a judgement on Australia or this case.
1. The article contains inconsistencies that I cannot reconcile.
The article begins with an emotive statement: “The two little boys have effectively grown up behind razor wire. In Australia.”
Children are not kept in detention in Australia. If they have grown up behind razor wire I would be asking why and where they were behind razor wire.
Given the Australian government policy of releasing women and children immediately into the community it would also be worth asking why they were detained for 18 Months (as suggested in the article).
2. Australia strongly supports the arrival of migrants/refugees.
It would be worth noting that on arrival on CI a mother and children fleeing from a war affected country would have been settled in the community and provided with:
· An income
· Furnished accommodation
· English language training
· Access to unlimited free health, dental and mental health services
· Lessons on Australian culture, heritage and values
· Training, Job skills support
· Assistance in finding employment including financial incentives for prospective employers to engage them
· Sporting equipment, kids toys, an education
· Etc.
These are basic services which the Australian people feel necessary to provide to refugees in order to assist them in starting a new life in a country that will protect and uphold their human rights.
3. Australia is not Sri Lanka
The article infers that she was called in for a “Chat” and is subsequently to be deported. This line of reasoning is clearly aimed at drawing an emotional response, particularly from Tamil Sri Lankans, many of whom have either personally experienced this type of abuse, or have been told first-hand accounts of this type of treatment, in Sri Lanka.
The Australian Government does not randomly ask people in for a chat. People don’t just disappear after a meeting with government officials in Australia.
As a refugee, and as a person within Australia, she has rights.
4. Australia upholds the UN Refugees Convention
The Woman has been deemed a refugee, by the Australian Government.
As a signatory of the UN Refugees Convention Australia cannot simply return the woman to Sri Lanka. She has rights. Australia up holds those rights. They even pay for legal advice to be provided to her so that she is aware of those rights.
The same convention also states that any country can refuse to allow an asylum seeker to live in the community and be granted protection if they present a national security threat. Australia is among many countries that adhere to this convention which is about upholding human rights. This does not mean however that the global community abandons these people.
5. The Australian political/legal system maintains the basic human rights of residents and those within its borders
Australia has an extensive appeals process for visa applicants. Australia also has a very active network of refugee advocates who volunteer their time, knowledge and limited resources to represent visa applicants and ensure they are aware of their rights and they have many.
Refugee applicants are provided the same rights whilst they are in Australia as Australian citizens, which includes full access to the Australian legal system and legal aid.
There are checks and balances in the Australian political and judicial system to up hold basic values such as justice and her rights.
6. The system aims for success not failure
I understand that around 99% of arrivals at CI are provided permanent residency or asylum. This system does not aim for failure. The system aims for them to succeed in their claim for assylum. That is why they have a right to appeal each decision made by the Australian Govenrment to the appropriate Australian court. Applicants almost always appeal every adverse finding as it has no cost to them.
The system also aims to settle refugees quickly and humanly.
I do therefore ask why is this applicant in the 1%, particularly as she is a woman with children? What risk could she pose?
The Article states that she was not informed of the reasons why her application was rejected but then subsequently infers (but does not state as fact) that it is because she is Tamil or has connections to the tigers. It does not provide any facts to justify this claim.
Why would an author abandon facts and aim to guide you down this emotive line?
7. If this article is misleading, what might be the alternative explanation?
Given the difficulty of establishing a relationship between a person with a military force given the state of Sri Lanka, the lack of records and the nature of the war I would suggest that her ethnic heritage was not the reason why her application was rejected.
Given that she was granted Asylum and subsequently failed a security check, I would ask the question: what activity did she undertake after arriving in Australia (and perhaps after being granted refugee status) that raised these security concerns?
In the absence of facts, the simplest explanation should be preferred.
8. ASIO is not infallible nor impervious to the Australian political/legal systems
As the article states: “And ASIO has been wrong before. In 2004, for example, ASIO was forced to pay around $200 000 compensation to a refugee who had been locked up for two years, having been falsely classified as a national security risk.”
This indicates to me that the Australian government is not only prepared to re-assess security claims but will also provide significant compensation if they are found to be in error. Does this not highlight the sense of justice and fairness that Australia applies to visa/refugee applicants?
Australia will not only reassess the check but pay compensation if they get it wrong. I only wish many other Australian institutions were as generous as this.
The article infers that there is no balance or checks to security assessments. That is not how the Australian political and legal systems interact. The separation of powers is a fundamental building block of western democracies.
9. More emotive gong banger material
Subsequently it states: “Villawood Detention Centre has become her new ‘home’ … and it may be for the rest of her and her children’s lives.”
Take a moment to reflect on this then refer to point 3 above.
There is a process, of which this woman is now part of, to find a safe country for her to settle. It is the process established through the UN conventions.
Australia does not send people to countries where they are likely to get harmed. This would be against the basic values to which Australians hold.
10. Denial of a fair trial
In the Australian judicial and political systems both sides get the opportunity to tell their perspectives. That is at the core of the Australian sense of fairness.
This article was a public post and therefore denies the Australian Government the ability to respond. If the Australian Government were to respond they would be taking away the applicants right to privacy. That is another right which Australian holds, and provides to visa applicants/refugees. The applicant does have the ability to publicly declare the reasons provided by the Australian Government as to why she was denied residency. The article does not disclose this information.
11. Australian Obligations
I am married to a Sril Lankan Tamil. My child is learning to speak Tamil. I have been to Sri Lanka. I have followed the war. I have heard turely horrific first hand accounts.
My wifes family escaped with nothing more than their lives after the 1983 Riots.
Every one of these people will tell you of the benefits they have enjoyed since arriving in Australia. The benefits of the christian values which are at the core of the Australian community, political and judicial system that have enabled them to feed and educate their families.
They are outstanding members of the Australian community who have spent their lives providing for their children and their adopted country.
Acceptance, tolerance, justice are all values which I would expect each of these refugees/migrants would say are amongst the list of values that Australias uphold. Truth is another.
I would expect that it is also therefore their obligation not only to highlight the cause of their homeland (Sri Lanka) and its people but to do so in a way that advocates Australia as a fair and just society that does accept, educate and support the less privaleged in the world.
I beleive that articles like this one do more harm than good, by creating a division amongst the community regarding the treatment of refugees and migrants and create resentment amongst many at how Australia is portrayed to the world.
There are many other ways to tell this womans story without creating division.
loading...
Wow. I don’t even know where to start correcting the false claims in this comment. For a start, the Govt was given the right to respond (and did). I spoke personally to DIAC and included their very own stats in the piece. You’re correct that children are no longer kept behind ‘razor wire’ in this country, but that wasn’t always the case. They are still detained, however, as the children are currently detained with Ranjini in Residential Housing (I’ve linked in the piece to a DIAC page that explains that).
Every other detail is 100 per correct and confirmed. Ranjini has no right of appeal. ASIO cannot tell her why she had an adverse check. She cannot be released into the Australian community. She cannot be sent home. A third country is highly unlikely to take her in. Asylum seekers are not given all the support you declare up there. They are given what Australian citizens are given when they are granted refugee status, but not before.
loading...
Spot on Rick! I work in Immigration Law and I don’t have the time to refute the number of falsities in the comment. I really hope other people educate themselves better!!
loading...
Good for you Rick – I was stunned as I read it.
loading...
The contention of your argument appears to be that: “Australia is not a humane society because it does not allow refugees to appeal their security assessment.”
It could be contested that:
1. There are many other ways to measure the humanity of a society. I listed some in my earlier response.
2. There may be other aspects of the decision to deny an appeal which are intended to protect other rights. I noted some of these in my post.
My issue with your article however, is not the right of appeal.
This story could have represented Australia as a country that upholds strong values, that welcomes refugees, migrants, etc. It could have presented data demonstrating a long history in this regard and highlighted current policies which do help refugees establishment a new life. It could have mentioned the just, sound and stable political and legal systems which aim to protect individual rights, regardless of ethnicity.
You did not choose this approach.
You chose to seek the support for your cause by making the reader embarrassed to be Australian, a comment highlighted in many of the responses. People don’t like to be made to feel this way and one of the responses to this feeling (other than to blog and tweet) is to demonstrate their frustration through resentment toward refugees/migrants and latch onto popular political chants and bumper stickers. “Turn back the boats” and “We are full” are two that come to mind.
I doubt this was your intention.
There are better ways to present this story.
Perhaps you could consider the following: “In order to uphold Australia’s reputation as a humane and just society we need to consider the current practice of denying refugees the right to appeal a secret security assessment. For example, …”
I would think that this approach draws people into supporting the argument and sells the message.
loading...
Yes – I *am* ashamed of my country because detaining a young mother and her children indefinitely, without charge or fair trial, is something I associate with Pinochet’s Chile rather than Australia!
Maybe Tim you can make the case that this woman is being put through a due legal process like the one we’re used to? No? You’re entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts. The fact is that she is being treated in a way that is more consistent with an authoritarian regime than a democracy.
loading...
Pingback: Ranjini needs our help to encourage the government to find a better way | Love versus Goliath : A Partner Visa Journey
I’ve also written about it. SO GLAD to see higher profile site than mine taking this on as well.
I’ve linked to your article from mine.
loading...
I’d also like to say that putting any organisation above the law, as they are doing with ASIO, is extremely dangerous. How can we trust that they are making the right decisions if they are completely unaccountable, and those who are targeted have no right of reply?
loading...
This is so terrible, and I truly cannot believe that this is happening in our country in this day and age. Unbelievable.
loading...
What a heart wrenching and horrible insight into the plight of refugees. I feel ill just thinking about this situation. My prayers are with Ranigini and her family.
loading...
Some of the comments on this are disgusting. This woman AND her children have been put in detention with no right of appeal (in Australia!), and all you people care about is whether she’s getting more Centrelink than the pensioner down the road?!
How can you people think that her life is any less valuable than yours? It’s this ‘us and them’ mentality that saw the genocide in Germany and Rowanda. Today I’m ashamed to be Australian.
loading...
As someone who has seen first hand through doing charity work in several third world countries, Sri Lanka being one of them, I can truly understand the reason why people leave and come to Australia, hoping to start a new life and gain some freedom. Yes, there are concerns on how much government money they are getting here once granted, but really, after where they come from, and what they have had to deal with, they deserve it. Let’s not judge these assylum seekers as MANY of us DO NOT know what circumstances they have left behind. Besides, weren’t many of our ancestors at one stage ‘boat people’ looking for a new start??
loading...
well I know that woman’s situation is a sad tale of woe, but speaking for myself I’m glad that we have ASIO and they are trying to vet people who we allow to live in our country. I’m not being paranoid but we do live in terrorist times
loading...
Yes but if they really are terrorists than ASIO should not be afraid to highlight the nature of the allegations and allow them to be subject to judicial review. That way we are behaving fairly and keeping our country safe.
loading...
But if we then have to live in a country where asylum seekers can be disappeared without trial for life, can you guarantee that won’t be extended to other social groups? What’s the point of destroying your society to defend it?
“First they came for Ranjini, but I was not an asylum seeker, so I said nothing…”
loading...
What surprises me is that this utterly shocking story of a loss of basic human rights has (at this stage) 69 comments, whereas a story about people being nasty to Delta Goodrem has over 370 comments (that’s nothing against the Delta Goodrem story btw) – It’s just interesting to see that people are so quick to jump in the conversation when it’s about something that is perhaps seen as a little less confronting, but seem to be turning their backs on this story (perhaps because it’s all a bit too hard??)
Anyway, thanks for getting this story out there. I hope that something comes of this… what scares me is the possibility that in a few weeks, everyone will forget and nothing will have happened. Rick, any chance of agreeing to do a follow-up down the track, to let us know if there are any updates? Because I know that I myself am often guilty of moving on to the next big story and leaving important issues like this behind (unintentionally) – after all, look at how the ‘cover the night’ Kony campaign flopped and that was after HUGE social media coverage in the initial weeks.
Hmm, sorry about my tangent here, I’m not sure I’ve really stayed on topic. Anyway, thanks again for the story, will sign the petition NOW!
loading...
Of course. I’ll be watching this one closely, don’t you worry!
loading...
Thank you!!
(And by the way, I do so love the Mamamia team, you guys do an awesome job)
loading...
Thanks for a great article Rick. This is a really ridiculous situation. As I pointed out, Ranjini may have had no choice of husband in the first place.
loading...
Where are people getting this “refugees get paid more than Australian elderly citizens do” stuff?
Come on everyone – Google is your friend.
Aged pension: Single = 695.30 a fortnight, partnered = $524.20
Refugee: $489.70 single no children a fortnight, $529.80 with a child, $442.00 partnered
At least know of which you complain
And yes, everyone is entitled to the same concession benefits.
Yeah refugees are getting a lot more, no?
loading...
Gee this wedding photo is super happy isn’t it! Surely it wasn’t an arranged marriage to guarantee citizenship.
ASIO do a job, let’s respect their investigation findings.
loading...
You’re a charming person.
PS: She was granted asylum. She didn’t need to marry anyone.
loading...
Have you ever tried to gain citizenship through marriage? A big hint: You HOPE to gain temporary residency first after having to justify your relationship. Then after 2+ years you HOPE to gain permanent residency. And then after a couple of years you can apply for citizenship. That’s a long time to keep proving your relationship to DIAC – never mind enormously expensive – just to get an Aussie passport.
Yeah there are scammers, just like there are in the UK, US and Canada. Don’t assume these people are just because they’re not flashing the grin you expect them to be.
loading...
Exactly! As someone about to go through the PR process with my partner (he’s a foreign national), it’s tough! Even tougher, though, was the application for temporary residency which cost, altogether, about $5,000 after we paid application fees, fees for various bits of documentation like police checks, translation fees of all foreign documents ($55/page!), a full medical with a government approved (read: private health) doctor, chest x-rays etc. It also took about 100 hours of our time collecting the documentation, writing out statements, collecting evidence (photos, cinema tickets, evidence of holidays together, concert tickets, shared finances, rental receipts etc). We then had to find a number of Australian citizens to complete statutory declarations for us, describing our relationship and why it is genuine, exclusive and loving (or something like that). We are happy (to an extent) to do this as we are aware that the government needs to have checks and balances in the system.
However, asylum cases are a different kettle of fish. While my partner can work legally here, asylum seekers can’t. On the one hand, people complain that they’re taking benefits from Centrelink, on the other hand, if they were allowed to work, people would bemoan the fact that they’re taking jobs from Australians.
My partner is lucky that his choice to live here comes from a desire to want to live with his partner. Asylum seekers have a different motivation for wanting to live here – for the most part, they seek security, they seek safety and they seek peace. While my partner can live out in the community, work to support himself (and maintain his self esteem, his independence etc.), many asylum seekers are treated with a presumption of guilt. And so many of them have mental health issues as a result of what they’ve fled in their home countries and detention simply compounds this. What is even sadder, though, is the complete ignorance that informs the attitudes of so many Australians toward asylum seekers.
loading...
My brother and his wife are having a hell of a time getting her a visa to come and live here. She is a Jordanian national of Palestinian descent. They have been married for over 2 years. They have a 1 year old daughter.
At Christmas, they spent 6 months and a great deal of money organising her a visitor’s visa for 3 months maximum. Apparently having a Palestinian heritage is enough to raise flags as per the Australian Consul in Amman.
Additionally, under Jordanian law, their daughter cannot take Jordanian citizenship as her father is a foreign national. She is therefore Australian. The hoops they had to go through to register her birth and get her a passport were amazing, one official even asking was my brother certain that the baby was his and suggesting that he might need a DNA test before the application could progress. (The official backed down from that one when my brother asked to speak to someone more senior and made a complaint about the insult to his wife!)
They want to come and live in Australia but it is being made very difficult. Therefore, they are carving a life for themselves in Jordan where, although my brother and neice cannot be citizens without dispensation from the King, they have been made welcome.
I can only imagine how much worse it is for these poor people who have arrived with nothing from a country to which they cannot return.
loading...
To Anon and Sandi – EXACTLY!!!! Been there, done that, writing a book about it.
Would be very interested in either of you sharing your experiences.
loading...
Are you serious???
You’ve just completely ignored the worst point of the article. That is that potentially she and her sons could be locked up for the rest of their lives with no avenue for appeal.
loading...
I’m with Rick. You are a really charming person. Not.
loading...
Wow. Shades of the Apartheid regime in South Africa at the height of the war against so-called terrorism. Except here, during that time, we’d have shot her and her kids, burned and buried the bodies. Very slippery slope you Aussies have going there in this sometimes insane fight to keep one’s country free of undesirables.
loading...
Yeah, I grew up in South Africa so when someone says, “But ASIO are the government security services! You have to trust them and don’t ask questions!” – my response is, “Really?”
loading...
Thank you mammamia for providing links so we can take action.
So sad.
loading...
This is a difficult situation. Obviously this is a terrible outcome for the family, however ASIO has their job to do. If she has received a negative clearance, it’s for a reason.
I do think that there should be somewhere she can go to take this further. Being in limbo is simply not acceptable but so say we’re ashamed to be Australian is taking things a little too far. We need to keep this country safe too.
loading...
Yes, ASIO have a job to do. I don’t think anyone questions that – what is WRONG in a civilised society is there is no right of appeal or opportunity for review of ASIO findings.
loading...
OK so maybe ASIO legitimately believes the mother is a security risk.
But why do the kids have to be locked up as well? Why can’t they stay with their stepfather? I don’t understand.
Surely this is should fall within the realm of judicial review. Everybody deserves a free trial.
loading...
Great, lets allow an individual representative of a government department to determine the fate of those already being persecuted. While we’re at it, lets make sure they don’t have to answer to anyone regarding their reasons, motives or proof.
Zero transparency. That’s never turned out badly.
loading...
F$%#, this stuff really strikes a nerve. I’ve had my own battles with the Australian Government and it only took a 2 year campaign to Chris Bowen that finally resolved them. What I learned about that whole process is that he has absolute power to make decisions regarding someone’s status in Australia. In fact, even though he obviously has a team working for him, his power is so almighty that matters don’t even get farmed out once they enter the Ministerial Intervention stage. He can say yes or no and determine someone’s fate. Although my case was deemed “emergency, treat with first priority” status and I had the Red Cross working tirelessly to help me out, it still took that long for a decision. One would hope that Ranjini’s case would at least be reviewed well before mine was considering her and her children are in detention. But we need to get the word out there!
Sign the petition but please don’t forget to tweet/call/email Chris. Hound this guy relentlessly. Even if ASIO had a 100% success rate with these cases, it should be a fundamental right that a person is entitled to at least review the evidence against them. I’m stunned that’s not the case.
loading...
I think this is the start of a slippery slope of civil rights in Australia. I mean, isn’t this how it started with the Jews in Germany?
loading...
At the risk of being attacked with torches and pitchforks, can I bring up the other side to this debate? That is, our nation’s security.
Yes, it is extremely unfortunate that this particular family are suffering, and it is sad that the children especially have spent so much time in detention. BUT, if they have detected possible links to rebel organisations that may pose a threat to my safety, my family’s, or anyone’s here in Australia, you betcha I want them investigating that.
Yes, ASIO may be wrong, but when it comes to the modern world, we have to be this cautious. Let’s face it, it has not been all luck that Australia has not faced a terrorist attack yet.
We have incredibly high safety and terrorism standards and I, for one, would like to see it stay that way.
If there was an attack and it turned out the perpetrator had slipped through the cracks and claims like these hadn’t been investigated, everyone would be up in arms!
Do I think these people should be given basic human rights? Yes
Do I think they deserve proper representation to argue these claims? Yes
Do I think they should be given more rights than the average Australian? Absolutely not.
loading...
No ptichfork here, but I want to correct a few things and point out others.
1. Ranjini already has fewer rights than the ‘average Australian’ because she cannot appeal her ASIO adverse rating. Australians and citizens *can* appeal.
2. Of course we don’t expect ASIO to stop conducting security assessments. All we ask is that due process take place and that the people involved have the right to hear the evidence, in court, and appeal it if they so wish.
loading...
Rick, I totally agree with you that they should be given the rights to argue the findings, as I said in my original comment.
But we do, I believe, have to tread very carefully here.
I am concerned that it may get to a stage where they are afforded MORE rights than the average Australian, and that is when we would definitely have issues in the future.
loading...
Miss B – name any rights non-citizens get that citizens don’t get. Go on, just name one.
loading...
For starters if approved to stay in our great country this lady and her children will be entitled to free accommodation, free medical and will be paid more money from Centrelink than our elderly retired citizens who actually paid taxes and built this wonderful country that we live in. That alone annoys the crapout of me because these illegal immigrants have to pay big $$$$ to get on one of these leaky boats in the first place. Sorry, I have no patience for people smugglers or their cargo.
loading...
That’s not actually true. Refugees are entitled to access some centrelink benefits, but they get paid less than pensioners. http://www.kochie.com.au/the-real-benefits-for-asylum-seekers-in-australia
loading...
It annoys me SO much that some people still don’t get this simple fact: it is NOT illegal to seek asylum; therefore people who arrive in Australia, via boat or plane or otherwise; seeking asylum, are NOT illegal immigrants.
loading...
You’re wrong. None of the refugees I’ve come across are living in free accommodation and they receive the same centre link allowances citizens receive in the same circumstances. As someone who’s worked with refugees, they’re only too keen to show you their paperwork in relation to any problems they have with rent/centre link/doctors etc.
You’ve been reading too many of those rubbish emails.
loading...
FALSE.
Debunked by Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/refugees.asp (guess what: this myth originated in the US!)
Covered by Media Watch in 2009: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2724620.htm
Addressed by Centrelink: http://www.centrelink.gov.au/internet/internet.nsf/media/statements.htm
Covered by Media Watch AGAIN in 2010: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2977986.htm
And addressed by the Refugee Council of Australia: http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/current/myths.html
loading...
Well, well Charlie, you sound a little nasty, don’t you?
As ‘Anon’ says below, we are giving these people the same, if not more benefits, than we give our own elderly.
Everyday we’re hearing about how many families are struggling to make ends meet, the rising cost of living and increases to taxes. And then more and more people arrive in their boats and they eat up our taxes further.
My point is that this WILL spiral. They will end up getting more rights than us if we allow it to continue the way it’s going.
And they will continue to take away resources and housing from Australians who just can’t get a look-in.
loading...
Miss B, Refugees have less rights than citizens, and get less generous benefits than pensioners. You ignore the actual facts & pretend that refugees are getting more benefits than citizens, which perpetuates prejudice against people who have already been persecuted.
loading...
There is actually a lot of evidence to suggest that migrants create jobs & refugees in particular are often very entrepreneurial and also take on jobs where there would otherwise be a skills shortage.
But the biggest problem with your argument here is that Australia accepts 13,000 refugees per year. We accepted 168,000 general immigrants from mainly the UK, China and India last year. So… why are refugees the concern?
I don’t think you can say, “we shouldn’t do this because maybe in the future this will happen” when you have no evidence to support that conclusion. Refugees have been arriving in Australia since after WW2, in several waves, and yet the sky hasn’t fallen in yet. I think we’ll be okay.
loading...
Can someone ring a tv station and highlight her case this normally gets the ball rolling and hopefully some beurocrats heads as well
loading...
While I have no choice but to place my trust in ASIO, I think it’s processes need to be accountable to SOMEONE. Maybe not the general public (that creates another security risk), but why not a high court judge?
How can Ranjini & family begin to accept this decision when they have no hope of ever understand why it was made, and no opportunity to defend themselves? Since when did Australia stop giving people ‘a fair go’?
C’mon ASIO – if you have a case against them, prove it. Allow your case to be independently reviewed. Don’t just stand there saying ‘because I said so’ and expect you wont ruffle feathers. The futures of 47 people are at stake here.
loading...
This makes me sick to my stomach and so, so ashamed of Australia.
loading...
shocking!!! as someone who has had to deal with immigration over the past 2 years and the uncertanity of our lives and having the government decide on our future whether we stay or go is incredibly stressful my heart goes out to this family and ive signed and forward the petition on.
loading...
This is absolutely horrific – these are CHILDREN.
They have already been granted refugee status – As far as I’m concerned ASIO missed their bite at the security cherry here. Until this family does something to indicate that it is actually a security threat they should be left alone. Would you tolerate this happening to a member of your family who had a lawful right to peacably enjoy their residency in Australia? I think not. Do unto others people, do unto others.
loading...
this is what i dont understand… shouldnt all these security checks be done while they are waiting to gain refugee status? they were already in detention for 2 years what on earth were ASIO doing then? ASIO need to prove that this woman is a threat. ridiculous.
loading...
It’s actually fairly common for them to be granted refugee status ‘pending security checks’, just to clarify.
loading...
This is appalling. A shame on the country.
loading...
How can boys that age be a threat?
loading...
I dont know the specific history of this lady, however we must be careful in assuming that just because someone is a mother with kids, that she must therefore be squeeky clean. Many many mothers with kids have done many bad things. It is a dangerous asumption to make.
loading...
You missed the point.
loading...
I didnt miss any point. Read everyone commenting on the fact it is a mother with kids, what risk could she be. we would never hear about this were it a childless man. I am just saying that security risk can come in all shapes, sizes…and genders.
loading...
It’s not impossible that she is a risk, but it is unlikely. But as HF said, that’s not the point: it’s the lack of review or appeal which is particularly appalling.
loading...
I don’t see this as a male/female issue. More that the evidence should be allowed to be tested by an impartial party.
loading...
You did miss the point WB. It’s shocking because there’s no indication that evidence shows she is actually a threat, and now she’s in limbo with no avenue to appeal and no human rights. It doesn’t matter whether that happens to a child, a mother, a father or a vagrent. It should never, ever occur. Especially in our own “first world” country!
loading...
Why is it unlikely that she is a threat? I’m not saying that she is, we don’t know, that’s ASIO’s job.. However, obviously if they have evidence, proving their case should not be problem. Just sayin’..
loading...
She could be a threat, I agree.
However, whether or not she is a threat isn’t being established. She’s just been put away without even knowing why.
See the problem?
loading...
The point is: they should be given a ‘fair trial’ first.
REGARDLESS of whether or not they are a threat.
In this case we’re assuming guilt and throwing away the key.
loading...
First of all, her children should not have been put in detention, that needs to be dealt with differently, and fast! Also, I genuinely think we should take in as many refugees as possible! We’re a lucky country and we can afford to share it around!
I completely agree that she deserves a fair trial, but you can’t expect ASIO to reveal their reasons publically. In an ideal world, these cases could be investigated thoroughly without jeapordising security.
I’m not saying that we should blindly accept whatever decisions ASIO make, but we are assuming that they are locking people up and throwing away they key without a thought. It seems very easy for us, sitting behind our computer screens, to get very wound up when we can’t possibly have all the facts.
I don’t know what my point is, I’m just saying that ASIO are doing a pretty important job here and I am inclined to trust their judgement.
loading...
2 male children, please don’t turn this into a gender topic.
loading...
I dont know the specific history of this lady, however we must be careful in assuming that just because someone comes from Sri Lanka that they are a threat to Australia’s national security. Many refugees have done nothing wrong and it is dangerous to assume that they have.
How can it ever be found out whether she is a threat to national security if the right processes are not in place? If you kill a person you receive a fare trial (strictly speaking) however you are not afforded this right if you are a refugee and ASIO decides, without having to give any sort of reason, that you are a threat?? Disgusting.
loading...
Perhaps, but these decisions still need an opportunity for judicial review.
The chidren should also be reviewed separate to the mother.
loading...
I don’t understand how justice conducted in secret can be just.
loading...
This is tragic. I’m fairly conservative around security matters and proper immigration (being a resident NYC-er on 9 11) but this is wrong. This is exactly how you create home grown terroists. These 2 little boys will hate Austrlia and the West! There has to be a way to review these assessments while keeping security info secure. To do otherwise is violating some of the most fundamental tenants of democracy.
Curious – if ASIO’s actions cannot be reviewed then how was the case referred to above ($200k verdict) won?
loading...
Appalling.
loading...
So wrong. Signed.
loading...
This is absolutely ridiculous and beyond belief. When was the last time a mother and her 2 sons carried out a terrorist attack on Australian soil.
Australian citizens are shooting, maming and killing each other a daily basis. These are the people we should be classifying as national security risks, not mothers with children.
I would also bet that if a terrorist attack was to take place, it won’t be by an asylum seeker but by someone who is already living in the country.
The Gov. comes up with these ridiculous laws without ever thinking about what effect they will have on ordinary citizens.
loading...
Hi,
I agree with your comment but I don’t think we should forget that men can be innocent too! Just because someone is a woman, doesn’t mean we should always view them as a peaceful victim. There are plenty of innocent men in detentions centers who don’t get public sympathy because they are automatically seen as a threat simply by being male! And plenty of women soldiers and terrorists. Gender really shouldn’t play into whether or not we feel sorry for someone. Children are of course a different matter.
loading...
I just don’t understand why Australia and Australians think we are going to be such a significant target for terrorism. It baffles me. Aren’t the real ‘threats’ those involved in gang warfare? Are our gangs made up of refugees or citizens?
I can’t even get my thoughts out clearly, this makes me so angry.
A bit of compassion goes a long way, and I don’t see how a woman and her two children are a valid threat to my way of life. And I think we, as citizens, should have an understanding of how anyone in our country will be judged. We should have transparency.
I don’t wish to offend anyone, and I am sorry if I have, but really, I just can’t support this kind of action.
loading...
The Bali attacks were aimed at Australians. There were other foreigners who were victims but Australian’s were the main casualties and not by accident. Terrorism is a real threat to this country. We have arrested people for planning terrorists attacks before. If anything the general public are too complacent.
Locking people up without review is not the way to go about policing terrorism, but it is a threat.
loading...
Utterly shocked. Way to destroy lives. Signed.
loading...
I too don’t usually sign petitions. But I signed this one and not because I am of Sri Lankan origin, but because I am Australian and I am increasingly concerned about the state of human rights in the country I love.
For me there are a couple of things that are galling:
- this family has no right of appeal, they will be held indefinitely (hmm, that sounds familiar – aren’t there a bunch of countries we judge/sanction/invade for that kind of thing?)
- this family will never understand what the charge is or why or have an opportunity to defend or explain themselves because there’s no right of appeal
- if you live in a country that thinks this is acceptable, the gradual and further erosion of our basic human rights (such as the right to a fair trial for its citizens) is only a matter of time. It’s a surprisingly small jump from treating refugees like this, to treating citizens like this, and it is naive of us to assume otherwise.
Winston Churchill apparently said something like you measure the degree of civilisation of a society by how it treats its weakest members.
Thank you Rick for keeping these issues in the spotlight.
loading...
Spot on. You have voiced my idea exactly. Thank you.
loading...
Totally agree!
Benjamin Franklin also said that “those would would sacrifice essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”.
loading...
Disgusting. I have signed and forwarded this on to family and friends. I hope there is a good outcome for Ranjini and her boys.
loading...
Disgraceful.
We need transparency.
signed and shared.
loading...
This is appaling. I have signed and shared.
loading...
I agree, these checks should be open to judicial review, even if it was only to be a closed, security approved court (ie a judge who only hears these cases) so as to protect our sensitive broader public sensibilities. Further, with all their resources at their disposal, why can’t ASIO monitor families like this for a defined period to determine if their propensity to be a “security risk” really does exist? And finally, one of our obligations as a country fighting to end terrorism, should be to offer those with alleged terrorist links the opportunity to rehabilitate (just like we do criminals in our jails)?
loading...
I have to put my trust in ASIO.
loading...
Unfortunately, so do the rest of us. But how can we, if they’ve been wrong before?
loading...
Haven’t you been wrong before? if you were, was your credibility damaged now? No system is 100%
However, I do believe that ASIO’s processes should be more transparent and that anyone has a right for representation, no matter who they are
loading...
Of course I’ve been wrong before. And of course that damages the trust some might have in me. Which is precisely why I would never make a claim, refuse to show you any of the reasons for it and then say ‘trust me’.
loading...
But rick maybe there are reasons that cannot be shared. There are a reason security classifcations exist, and the general public, regardless of what they may, does not have a right to know everything. How do we know there isn’t more to the story?
loading...
Goodness, I’m not asking them to share the details on the front page of the Daily Tele.
I think it’s entirely reasonable however for those details to be shared in a closed court of law where the refugee has access to ‘responsible counsel’ as Julian Burnside says.
That is definitely not too much to ask.
loading...
why ‘have’ to? i am genuinely curious.
loading...
In my history classes at university we read released documents from the past about the activities for intelligence agencies – ASIO, CIA, MI5 etc. The shit these people were up to would scare you. I would not trust such a group without oversight. All forms of government agencies need checks and balances, they can be secret oversights if they must. Mistakes get made.
loading...
The right to hear the evidence against you and the right to appeal that evidence is a fundamental, utterly basic part of our justice system and it leaves me actually mind-blown that this is a feature of the security check process. It would scarcely be better if ASIO had never got it wrong in the past … but they have. More than once.
loading...
Regardless of whether they have got it right or wrong in the past this is a system so open to abuse it is frightening. That people can be taken away at the drop of a hat because of some secret allegation made against them. Remind you of anything? Communist China, Stalinist Russia… the list goes on. This is devastating and should NOT be happening in a supposed democracy.
loading...
Agreed.
loading...
Immigration law scares me so much. With the power the legislature gives the Immigration Minister and his department, plus the almost elimination of public law review avenues as well any ‘loopholes’ being snuffed out by amendments as soon as theyre discovered by the court, even the legit cases don’t seem to stand a chance.
Don’t get me started on the decisions that actually get to appeal, some of them are truly ridiculous! Immigration is truly frustrating!
loading...
Unbelievable that this can happen in 21st century Australia! Reminds me of medieval witchhunts – accused has no right of reply and who even knows what merit the accusation has!
loading...
Awful!!!
I signed
Even entered my number
loading...
So I have never been one to sign petitions, rally, contact my members of parliament etc. But i am so outraged and disgusted by this that I am now one of “those people”.
I don’t want my child knowing that this happened in Australia and we did nothing about it.
It’s now all over my facebook, my twitter and is part of water cooler conversation in my workplace. Minister Bowen, Attorney General Roxon, Prime Minister Gillard have been contacted by me.
I am one – we are many. This must change not just for this family, but for all families.
loading...
I have signed the petition. Now I am sad for their family. When will it all end.
I can’t imagine how scared she must be. Just when she thought she was able to move on too! how cruel!
loading...
This is disgusting. I’m ashamed, embarrassed and outraged by this. FFS, these are families, children, that we are talking about.
loading...