Pros And Cons Of Mandatory Detention System

Mandatory detention brings no benefit for the Government or anyone else involved, in fact it has quite the opposite effect. There is a long list of drawbacks for the detention system, and one important example is that statistically, if eighty-eight per cent of asylum seekers are found to be genuine refugees, then they are in most cases entitled to a life in Australia under our protection. The urgency for vigorous border protection drops if such a high number is being resettled, as there will obviously be a lower percentage of people who are trying to enter the country for other reasons than to claim refugee status. If there is less urgency for border protection, the cost factor involved would not be so ridiculously large, and the unnecessary use of the aforementioned amounts of money in the whole scheme
should not need to be spent. Another important disadvantage to take into account, which the government does not like to admit to, is that detention does not deter. The entire system of mandatory detention has been built up around the idea of deterring further asylum seekers from making their way to Australia. The Abbott Government has managed to convince a large amount of the public that this is working, as no boats have arrived in Australia since late 2013, not long after the Liberal party came into power. But in reality the navy and border protection at sea have been stopping boats before they can reach Australian waters and turning them around.
Boats are being stopped in the physical sense, but they are not deterring them. This is because when a person or group of people are being persecuted or fear persecution, they will do anything to save themselves. It is an instinct that almost every human has, to flee in the face of danger. The idea of mandatory detention cannot therefore deter people when in danger because at that point, they do not think about where they will end up, rather how they can escape. Although the act of turning the boats back, the ‘stop the boats’ policy, has gained support from a portion of Australians with a certain mind-set, the government have been receiving a lot of disrespect for their actions internationally. Organisations such as the UNHCR, the International Human Rights Commission, the Commonwealth Ombudsman and Amnesty International have all reported that inspections of detention centres do not meet the minimum standards for the housing of asylum seekers, and that Australia is breaching international law by not upholding it’s
duties. Individual countries including India, China, the USA and the United Kingdom have also communicated their disgust at the way Australia is handling its asylum seekers and have voiced their support of an independent inquiry into human rights offences that the Australian government is believed to be committing within the centres. Having a reputation for not upholding human rights does not benefit the government in any form and the end to mandatory detention would resolve all of these issues.