This week has brought a halt to a human rights inquiry concerning the detention centre on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island, one of the off-shore facilities in which asylum seekers to Australia are held while their cases are being processed. The inquiry has been halted due to a somewhat unclear mix of international politics. It is, however, readily apparent that stopping a human rights inquiry would tend to set off a few alarms. How did we get to this point where murky relations to human rights are so routine that anyone could feel comfortable with such a stoppage?
It started on 17 February, when Iranian national Reza Berati died during violence at the centre that took place on 16 and 17 February. Perhaps around 30 other people were injured, according to Papua New Guinea Today. The Sydney Morning Herald reported that other asylum seekers, unable to be identified due to an Australian court order, shouted out to visiting journalists that workers at the centre had hit Mr Barati, who fell down stairs and was hit ‘in the head until he died’.
In response, Papua New Guinea’s Justice David Cannings initiated the inquiry. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation reports that, late on Friday, ‘the inquiry was put on hold after lawyers for the PNG government obtained a stay order in the Supreme Court in Port Moresby,’ claiming that Justice Cannings is biased because he has worked as a human rights lawyer. Immediately following this, Justice Cannings launched a new inquiry, and allowed Australian barrister Jay Williams access to the centre. All this has clashed with Papua New Guinea’s and Australia’s Prime Ministers, respectively Peter O’Neill and Tony Abbott, who are, according to Mr Abbott, in concert in agreeing that there ought to be no inquiry. Mr Abbott added that most of the asylum seekers were ‘economic migrants’ rather than true refugees.
To add further troubling circumstances to this matter, there is much that is contradictory and unclear in how this inquiry shutdown is being handled. Islands Business, for instance, reports that the office of Julie Bishop, Australia’s Foreign Minister, says that she was not involved in discussions regarding the inquiry, despite Papua New Guinean Foreign Minister Rimbink Pato’s claims to the contrary. Earlier in the month, Prime Minister O’Neill was actually quite deferential concerning Justice Cannings’ investigation, and it is uncertain what prompted the backflip. These kinds of gaps between governments, and between changed positions, remain unexplained.
What ought to remain central is the question of human rights. November saw a United Nations Commissioner for Refugees report stating that the conditions at the Manus Island centre, and also at the fellow off-shore processing centre on Nauru, do not meet international or Australian human rights requirements. According to Andrew Morrison and Greg Barns, prominent Australian barristers, the Australian federal government is likely facing great liability for neglect of its duty of care to asylum seekers. With Prime Minister Abbott emphasising his confidence in Papua New Guinea’s ability to handle any investigative matters, and Foreign Minister Bishop’s lack of involvement, it looks like the Australian approach is one of strategic distance on top of a refusal to change policies. With Papua New Guinean and Australian concern mounting, that is not going to be a distance that can hold.