Australia hosted about 18,000 refugees and asylum seekers in need of protection at the end of 1997. These included about 10,000 persons resettled and about 1,000 granted asylum during the year, more than 2,000 people with temporary protection, and applicants in 4,615 pending asylum cases. Resettlement Under its refugee and special humanitarian programs, Australia allocated 12,000 admission places for fiscal year 1997-98, which began on July 1, 1997. These consist of up to 10,000 "offshore places" for refugees resettled from overseas and up to 2,000 "onshore places" for persons granted asylum in Australia (the latter number is for planning purposes only; Australia sets no technical limits on how many persons can be granted asylum.) Of the 10,000 offshore places, 4,000 are for the refugee category (persons meeting the UN Refugee Convention's definition), 3,617 for the "special humanitarian program," or SHP (for people outside their country who have experienced, or have fear of, gross discrimination amounting to substantial violation of their human rights), and 2,383 for the "special assistance category," or SAC (for persons with close links to Australia and who are particularly vulnerable but do not fit in the other categories). Most allocations within the refugee and SHP categories for 1997-98 are for persons from the former Yugoslavia, followed by persons from the Middle East. Groups designated under SAC include people from the former Yugoslavia, Vietnam, Sudan, Sri Lanka, and Burma, and Ahmadi Muslims. "Onshore" Asylum Australia received 10,965 new applications for protection visas (PVs) in the 1997 calendar year (compared with 7,540 in 1996). Nationals of Indonesia (mostly East Timorese), China, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka accounted for more than 60 percent of the new applications. During the year, the government adjudicated 15,180 PV applications at the primary stage, approving 1,009 (7 percent) and denying 14,171 (93 percent). At year's end, 4,615 asylum applications were pending. Persons from Sri Lanka, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Somalia received the largest number of asylum grants. Persons whose applications for asylum visas are rejected at the primary stage may, within 28 days, apply to the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) for a full merits review of their claim (in addition, the immigration minister has discretionary authority to hear appeals). In 1997, the RRT received 11,356 applications for review. It adjudicated 6,026 appeals during the year, approving 589 (10 percent) and denying 5,437 (90 percent). At year's end, 9,925 appeals were pending. Throughout the year, the RRT faced increasing criticism by refugee and human rights advocates, who claimed the appeals body was politicized. Critics said the RRT had lost much of its independence and that government policy influenced its decisions. The criticism intensified in March, when the government announced reforms to the refugee review process to shorten overall processing times and reduce frivolous applications. Effective July 1, 1997, to obtain work authorization, an asylum applicant must apply for a protection visa within 45 days of arrival in Australia. Persons who file asylum appeals with the RRT after July 1 and are unsuccessful must pay a $1,000 post-decision fee. Proposed amendments to the Migration Act of 1958, remaining before the parliament at year's end, included changes in the asylum appeals process. These included eliminating judicial review of negative RRT decisions and giving the head of the RRT greater authority over the tribunal. The government has also considered changes in its system of providing legal advise to asylum seekers and other migrants. These included: tightening registration requirements for persons acting as "migrant agents"; imposing a registration fee on nonprofit agents; and replacing the current government-run migrant-agent program with a privately run Migration Agents Registration Authority (MARA), which would require agents to meet additional requirements. However, the Sydney-based Immigration Advice and Rights Center noted that 22 percent of agents who work in the nonprofit sector are not even members of MARA, and that delegating regulatory authority to the private sector would be premature. The Refugee Council of Australia said changes could adversely affect services and expose refugees to unscrupulous agents. Asylum Seekers from East Timor Australia is one of the few countries that recognizes Indonesia's 1976 annexation of East Timor. The United Nations still considers East Timor a Portuguese-administered UN territory. In 1996, the RRT ruled that Australia need not grant refugee status to East Timorese because Portugal considers them to be Portuguese citizens who thus do not need international protection. On May 2, 1997, the Full Federal Court issued a ruling in the case of East Timorese asylum seeker Jong Kim Koe, finding that the RRT had made no legal error in its decision that certain East Timorese, including Mr. Jong, are Portuguese nationals for purposes of the UN Refugee Convention. However, the court also concluded that nationality must be "effective" for purposes of the Convention and that the RRT had failed to consider the effectiveness of Mr. Jong's Portuguese nationality as a "distinct issue." This latter issue was returned to the RRT to decide. The ruling revived the hopes of 1,370 East Timorese asylum seekers in Australia, for whom the Jong decision was a test case. After the ruling, the government said it would consider appealing the case or passing legislation to overrule the judgment. In addition, the government threatened to deport the East Timorese. At year's end, however, it had not acted on legislation, deportations, or appeal. The RRT was not expected to rule on the "effective nationality" issue until 1998. Although the Australian government asserts that it is not required to grant refugee status to East Timorese, it has stated that it will continue to consider such applications on their individual merits. Thus, whether the applicant has the effective protection of Portugal is determined individually. Temporary Protection Although Australia has no legislative system of temporary protection, it creates classes of temporary visas in response to upheaval in individual countries. Citizens of such countries already in Australia on other visas may extend their stay. As of July 1997, 1,817 Sri Lankans and 525 persons from the former Yugoslavia held visas providing temporary protection until July 31, 1998. Other Developments Australia's highest court of appeals ruled in February that China's one-child-per-family policy does not constitute grounds for refugee status. This ruling contrasts with U.S. law, under which persons fleeing forced abortion or sterilization may qualify as refugees on the basis of political opinion.
Disclaimer:

This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.