Irony

Since 2013, the Australian government has detained refugees without trial in Pacific gulags, where they are abused, tortured, and driven to suicide. The policy is not just an abuse of human rights and possible crime against humanity; it has also had a corrosive effect on the states Australia uses as hosts. Nauru in particular has turned into a dictatorship, banning the media, evicting the opposition from parliament, and ending freedom of speech in an effort to stop criticism of the flow of Australian gulag money. And now, some of the victims of that regime are applying for asylum in Australia:

A former Nauruan politician is seeking political asylum in Australia as a retrial of anti-Government protestors kicks off in the island nation today.

Squire Jeremiah is a member of the so-called Nauru 19, a group of former opposition MPs and their supporters who were charged with rioting and disrupting the legislature over protests outside the nation's Parliament in 2015.

Mr Jeremiah and his cousin, Rutherford Jeremiah, fled to Australia in September.

He says the Government is determined to have them convicted.

And he's right. Nauru has conducted a campaign of persecution against these people, and then when the courts finally ruled it was illegal, abolished them. Now, they've bought in a Fijian judge, whose claim to fame is purportedly legalising a coup, to hear the trial. As the former chief justice says, this is simply an abuse of the judicial process.

The irony here: Australia's anti-refugee policies in the Pacific are now creating refugees in the Pacific. Its appropriate that they clean up their mess, and give sanctuary to those who they are having persecuted. If not, New Zealand should offer to help.

Cruel and barbaric

Over the weekend, Nauru threw out NGO Médecins Sans Frontières, which had been providing mental health services to the suicidal inmates of australia's concentration camp there. So what is the Nauruan regime going to do about suicidal refugees now that it has removed their only source of support? Arrest them:

Refugee advocates say police in Nauru have arrested a 36-year-old Iranian refugee for attempting suicide.

The Refugee Action Coaltion said the refugee swallowed washing powder at the Anibare camp on Monday afternoon.

The Coalition's Ian Rintoul said although the man was in obvious distress, police arrested him rather than calling an ambulance.

It follows a government edict made last week that any refugee who threatens or attempts suicide be arrested.

And its unclear whether they even gave him medical treatment.

This is simply cruel and barbaric. There's a reason civilised countries don't criminalise attempted suicide: because it doesn't work. Mental health issues are exactly that - health issues - and need to be dealt with by appropriate treatment, not the criminal justice system. Of course, the best way of dealing with these issues would be to remove the underlying cause: being detained for years without hope in an Australian concentration camp. But with Nauru being paid tens of thousands of dollars per refugee to torture them, why would they want to do that?

Australia wants refugees to die

Australia is currently detaining hundreds of refugees in a concentration camp on Nauru. Being detained indefinitely without hope pretty obviously causes mental health issues, and self-harm and attempts at suicide are regular occurances. To some extent, this problem is mitigated by NGO Médecins Sans Frontières, which provides counselling to Australia's gulag victims. But now, the Nauruan regime has ordered them to leave:

Nauru’s government has ordered Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) to stop work there immediately, despite a physical and mental health crisis in the country.

The medical NGO has been providing psychological and psychiatric services to residents, asylum seekers and refugees on the island since late 2017.

MSF staff wrote to its clients on Saturday to tell them it could no longer offer them treatment because of an order from Nauru’s health minister, who said the its services were “no longer required on the island”.

MSF said in its letter that the order meant its “mental health activities in Nauru must stop, effective today, Saturday, 6th of October”.

The Nauruan regime has not given a reason for this decision, but its pretty obvious: because Australia wants them to. MSF referrals are key to refugees winning cases in Australian courts to be transferred there for urgent medical care (which cannot be provided by Nauru's inadequate medical system). No more doctors means no more referrals, and no more refugees entering Australia. As with "Nauru's" decision to ban the media, we will no doubt find Australia's sticky fingers all over this.

Of course, kicking out MSF effectively means prohibiting refugees from receiving proper medical care, a decision which will inevitably cost lives. But Australia and its puppet regime in Nauru don't care about that. They want refugees to kill themselves, or die miserable deaths due to inadequate care, pour encourager les autres.

This decision is pure, unmitigated evil. And both the Australian and Nauruan governments should go to The Hague for it.

Australia undermined freedom of the press in Nauru

When Nauru effectively banned journalists five years ago, it was very convenient for Australia, silencing all sorts of awkward questions about their concentration camp on the island and what was going on there. Except it wasn't merely "convenient": it turns out that Australia had conspired with Nauru to make it happen:

The Australian government is jointly responsible for Nauru’s media access policy for the immigration detention centre, departmental documents reveal, despite claims for years that it is solely an issue for Nauru.

The Australian government has repeatedly claimed it has no involvement in Nauru’s decisions around media access and specifically its repeated refusal to Australian outlets.

But the previously unpublished official arrangements, tendered to federal court as part of an affidavit in a Nauruan medical transfer case, reveal the notoriously restrictive media policy to be a joint effort.

“The governments of Australia and Nauru will agree to a media and visitor access policy and conditions of entry,” the document said. “Media seeking access to centre will be required to obtain permission from the [Nauruan] secretary for justice and to sign a media agreement.”

The Australian government then claimed it had nothing to do with the media ban, and that it was entirely up to Nauru. It turns out they were lying. Who'd have thunk it?

This isn't ethical, and its not acceptable. Australian voters should hold their government to account for it.

Disappointed

Before the Pacific Forum meeting on Nauru, there was hope that the Prime Minister would represent New Zealand values while she was there. Nauru is a concentration camp for Australia, a place of incarceration and torture for the refugees Australia doesn't want to acknowledge. Any decent New Zealand Prime Minister should have taken a stand, denounced this, and done something about it: rescued the refugee children whose torture at Australian hands is driving them to suicide; offered them the free seats on the 757 which flew her there; at least met with them.

But of course, Ardern did none of that:

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern met with agencies helping refugees in Nauru yesterday but didn't meet directly with refugees.

Ms Ardern was in the country to attend the Pacific Islands Forum, but the issue of asylum seekers detained there on the behalf of the Australian government was also raised.

Ms Ardern had said she wanted to see what life was like for the refugees, but before leaving Nauru confirmed she hadn't had direct meetings because she didn't want to raise expectations.

"I do get letters from refugees here - I have had stories come in to me that way and I've read those letters, I've replied to them.

"But I was worred about raising those expectations."

Or, to put it another way, she was worried about giving them hope. The very thing she is meant to stand for.

Australia's Pacific concentration camp is something kiwis feel very strongly is wrong. Absolutely, fundamentally wrong. And not just kiwis: Australia has been refered to the International Criminal Court over its treatment of refugees, though there's no word yet on whether Australian political leaders will face the justice they deserve for it. The least Ardern could have done is represented that feeling.

But I guess you can always rely on a politician to disappoint.

No press freedom in Nauru

The Pacific Islands Forum is happening in Nauru, and the media focus has understandably gone on the refugees Nauru detains in a concentration camp on behalf of Australia. But it seems that Nauru's authoritarian government isn't very keen on that:

1 NEWS Pacific correspondent Barbara Dreaver has been detained by authorities in Nauru while covering the Pacific Islands Forum.

World Vision told 1 NEWS that Dreaver was conducting an interview with a refugee when detained by police around 1pm today.

An official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade is with Dreaver but 1 NEWS is unsure of her whereabouts.

Detaining journalists for doing their jobs and reporting on matters of public interest is outrageous - but sadly what's expected now in Nauru. Once a democracy, the country has become an authoritarian state, driven in that direction by the flow of Australian gulag money. Australian racism has given us a dictatorship in our own back yard. And if Australia ever changes its policy and cuts off that money, then things on Nauru will likely get even worse.

Nauru is farming refugees

World Vision has launched a campaign to get the New Zealand government to resettle refugees from Australia's concentration camp on Nauru in New Zealand:

World Vision national director Grant Bayldon said they were asking Ardern to make the offer directly to Nauru, rather than Australia.

"While there remains an obligation on Australia under international law, it doesn't look like they are going to do the right thing any time soon."

Another element of the campaign was that they were asking for the evacuation of children and their families to be prioritised, Bayldon said.

They should be brought to safety in New Zealand before Universal Children's Day in November, he said.

"These vulnerable people seeking refuge and asylum should be resettled in New Zealand as part of an emergency intake over and above our refugee quota," he said.

Of course we should do this - its the humanitarian thing to do. But I suspect Nauru's response will be a firm "no". And the reason for that is that being Australia's concentration camp is big business for the Pacific despotism. Australia pays Nauru by the prisoner, and releasing any of them has a direct impact on the government books. Last year's budget took a 10% hit from "uncertainty surrounding the number of refugees who will be resettled in the United States" and another 5% due to less tax from foreign concentration camp workers. Once you include the families, rescuing these 120 children would likely have a similar financial impact. The Nauruan government just isn't going to want to give that up.

Of course, refusing to release people because you'll lose money is morally reprehensible. But "morally reprehensible" pretty much describes the Nauruan government these days. In addition to the crime of running a concentration camp, they've jailed the opposition, undermined the judiciary, and banned foreign journalists. So I expect Baron Waqa and his cronies to reject any offer of resettlement New Zealand makes. The only way they'll surrender any of their refugee cash cows is if Australia cuts off the funding.

Dodgy as hell

Like many former Pacific colonies, Nauru retrained judicial links with its former colonial master, using an Australian court as its final court of appeal. Last month they abolished those ties. That's a good move, except for one detail: they did it in secret, and apparently to strip defendents in political cases of their appeal rights:

Nauru's justice system is without any court of appeal, after the Nauruan government severed ties with the Australian judicial system.

The move by the Pacific island's government has left former Opposition MPs involved in highly-politicised cases with no avenue of appeal.

Their lawyers only found out about the change after a chance encounter with senior Nauruan officials on a flight to Brisbane.

[...]

The ABC understands this took place on 12 December and that it took effect three months later.

Nauru establishing its own supreme court is a good thing. But this seems calculated to deny justice to the government's political enemies. And that's simply not acceptable.

Australia denies refugees medical care again

Since 2013, Australia has been detaining refugees in concentration camps on Nauru and Manus Island. The refugees face persistent neglect by the government that has a duty-of-care towards them - including an explicit denial of basic medical care:

Nearly 50 refugees and asylum seekers held on Nauru – including at least three women seeking to terminate a pregnancy – are being refused, or not considered for, overseas medical treatment, in defiance of doctors’ recommendations.

Three pregnant refugee women on Nauru have asked to terminate their pregnancies, for cultural, familial and health reasons. Doctors’ requests for them to be transferred overseas for the procedure have been rejected. Terminations are illegal on Nauru, a devoutly Christian country.

And Australian immigration department staff have confirmed to the Guardian that nearly 50 refugees and asylum seekers are on a waiting list for approval for medical transfer for a variety of conditions including musculoskeletal injuries and surgeries that cannot be performed on the island.

Why is the waiting list so long? Because all transfers must be approved by the Nauru hospital overseas medical referral committee, which never meets. And in the case of abortion, will not approve overseas transfer because it is illegal on Nauru. And this suits the Australians perfectly - both because it increases the harshness of the conditions in the concentration camps, but also because it prevents refugees from exercising their legal rights once in Australia to avoid being sent back to torture and neglect - thus fulfilling the government's promise to never let them into Australia.

This is absolutely vile. As for the solution, there's an obvious opportunity for the New Zealand government to step in and provide the medical care Australia won't. But that would require politicians who aren't craven vassals of our racist neighbours.

Some good news on Nauru

The Australian government has reached a deal to send the refugees it is currently imprisoning on Nauru to the USA:

Refugees languishing on Manus Island and Nauru will be offered resettlement in the United States under a "one-off" arrangement announced by the Turnbull government.

The long-awaited breakthrough will see the 1800 detainees encouraged to return home, seek resettlement in the US or face an indefinite stay in the Nauruan community.

Getting people out of Australia's Pacific torture camps is the priority here, and its good to see that the USA has stepped in to help that happen. But note that this is a one-off arrangement - it doesn't end the Pacific solution, and future refugees Australia kidnaps at sea will still face rendition and indefinite detention without trial in violation of the Refugee Convention. In other words, don't start buying Australian just yet.

Against restoring aid to Nauru

In 2015, New Zealand suspended all aid to Nauru after the country sacked its chief justice and suspended opposition MPs from Parliament. Now, Murray McCully is apparently thinking of restoring it:

New Zealand is considering whether to restore its aid spending to Nauru.

[...]


The New Zealand Prime Minister John Key met with Nauru President Baron Waqa during the recent Pacific Islands Forum summit in Pohnpei.

Mr Waqa said Mr Key indicated New Zealand would look to restore some of the $US878,000 in aid that had been suspended.

An official with the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs said they were exploring whether the unspent justice funding could be redirected to other projects in Nauru.

To which the obvious question is "why?" Nothing has changed - Nauru's judiciary is still not independent, and opponents of the government still face persecution for their views. Most recently, the Nauruan government is attempting to murder an opposition MP by arbitrarily cancelling their passport, preventing them from travelling for life-saving medical treatment. And of course they're still hosting an Australian concentration camp...

Nauru is not a regime we should be supporting in any way. We should not be restoring aid.

Another camp-guard quits

A third organisation has decided that it no longer wants to help Australia to run concentration camps for refugees:

A company contracted to provide support for refugees and asylum seekers on Nauru is pulling out, after deciding it would not re-tender for the contract.

The Guardian reports sources on Nauru saying Connect Settlement Services told workers and refugees at a meeting on Monday it would be gone by Christmas.

The agency, which took over after Save the Children pulled out last year, is believed to have consistently raised concerns about poor mental healthcare and child protection services on Nauru.

CSS is the third major contractor to announce a pull out in recent weeks after the security contractor, Wilson Security, and the main contractor, Ferrovial, which took over Broadspectrum, announced they would not seek to renew contracts.

Which means Australia either needs to find new gulag guards, or run the camps itself. Or shut them down. And they're clearly anticipating the latter by moving to ban any former gulag inmate from ever entering Australia - a move which would allow New Zealand to take these refugees, and protect Australia from the implausible scenario that, having built a new life here, they might choose the society which rejected, abused and tortured them over the one which welcomed them. Its an illuminating illustration of just how titanic Australia's ego is - they seriously think that, having tortured people, their victims will still be trying to join their putrid, racist country.

As for how we should respond, banning any Australian who has worked in the camps, or (more importantly) voted for them would be a good start. But you'd expect them to fail the "good character" test in any case.

More horror-stories from Nauru

Another week, another leak containing more horror stories from Australia's refugee concentration camp on Nauru:

Child and adult refugees held on Nauru under Australia’s offshore detention regime are continuing to report allegations of sexual abuse and engage in self-harm, new leaked documents reveal.

The new incident reports, seen by the Guardian, include a harrowing account of the alleged rape of a refugee, who refused to report the encounter to Nauruan police. The reports also tell of children stubbing out cigarettes on their arms, trying to jump off buildings and attempting suicide by other means.

The reports make reference to “ongoing, significant risks” to children held on Nauru between January and March this year. The leak follows the Guardian’s publication of the Nauru files, incident reports revealing the trauma and abuse inflicted on children held by Australia in offshore detention.

There's full (and unpleasant) details in the article. One of the things it makes clear is that the refugees do not feel they will receive justice from the Nauruan police. This of course is then used by the Nauruan and Australian governments to dismiss all claims of abuse and victimisation as fabricated, when really its just another example of how they are victimised.

This abuse and victimisation of refugees by Australia and Nauru constitutes an ongoing crime against humanity. It has to stop. And those responsible for it need to be held to account for it in The Hague.

We should do the right thing on Nauru

At the moment Australia is detaining and torturing thousands of refugees in its Pacific concentration camps on Nauru and Manus Island. Apparently, they'd like us to help end their human rights abuse by taking refugees directly from Nauru. But our government is apparently refusing:

The New Zealand government won't be extending its offer to re-settle 150 refugees in Nauru to the Pacific Island, saying it's proposal was only for Australia.

The comment comes after Australia's Immigration Minister Peter Dutton suggested New Zealand could take refugees held in its detention centre on Nauru.

In 2013, New Zealand offered to take in 150 refugees off Australia's hands - an offer that was never taken up.

Mr Dutton has said any deal to take refugees "was an issue between Nauru and New Zealand".

[...]

New Zealand Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse said the offer made was in relation to those who had been approved as convention refugees.

In a statement, he said the Government is "not considering entering into a separate arrangement directly with Nauru".

Which is a stupid response. Yes, these people are ultimately Australia's responsibility: they applied for asylum in Australia, and rather than meet its obligations under the Refugee Convention, Australia rendered them to a Pacific gulag to be tortured as a "deterrent" to others. But in this situation, the most important thing is to end the torture - not quibble over who is responsible. The New Zealand government should stop pissing around, and open those spaces directly to refugees from the camps. It's the humanitarian thing to do.

(And remember: don't buy Australian)

Nauru's corrupt justice minister

Last year, when Australia's ABC revealed evidence that Nauru's President and justice minister had received tens of thousands of dollars in bribes from a phosphate company, Nauruan justice minister David Adeang denied the allegations. But its now undeniable. Why? Because ABC has the bank records to prove it:

New documents have emerged detailing tens of thousands of dollars being paid by an Australian company to the family of Nauru's Justice Minister, David Adeang.

The bank records reveal monthly transactions from the account of the phosphate company Getax, which was formerly based on the Gold Coast.

[...]

Amounts of $10,000 were transferred on several occasions from Getax's Westpac account into the ANZ bank account of Madelyn Adeang, the late wife of Minister David Adeang.

The payments were described as "Consultancy fees", or "Fees for Adeang".

And no doubt Adeang will deny this too. But the evidence is clear: he accepted bribes. He should be prosecuted for it, but with police and a court system totally under the thumb of the government, that looks unlikely.

Nauru sinks further into dictatorship

Speaking of Nauru, our neighbours sank further into dictatorship yesterday when the Parliament passed legislation legitimising their unlawful seizure of an opposition MP Sprent Dabwido's passport and preventing the courts from overturning such decisions:

The Nauru government has passed amendments to the country's passport laws to give it broader powers to cancel passports.

It had earlier cancelled the passports of several former MPs and others who allegedly took part in an anti-government protest in June 2015.

The Justice Minister David Adeang introduced the amendments to the Passport Act 2011, which passed with a voice vote in the house, where the government enjoys a 16-2 majority.

He told parliament the new law allows the government to cancel passports of people it reasonably thinks might engage in acts that threaten the national or economic security of the country.

And of course opposing the government is considered a threat to national security.

In this case, Dabwido will die unless he receives medical treatment in Australia (Nauru's medical facilities are substandard, of course - gulag money goes to politicians, not hospitals!) So, the government is basicly trying to kill an opposition MP, or force a by-election by forcing them to become a foreign citizen in order to receive a travel document to leave the country. Australia could end this abuse in an instant by jerking its purse-strings. The fact that they don't tells you everything you need to know about their desire for democracy and human rights on Nauru.

How it works in Nauru

Another sign that Nauru is becoming a dictatorship: a man who filed an electoral petition against the Prime Minister has had his pension suddenly cut off:

A Nauru man has had his only source of income, his pension, cut off by the government.

No reason has been given but Dale Cecil is convinced it is because he has brought an election petition against President Baron Waqa in the Boe constituency.

Mr Cecil accuses Mr Waqa of bribery, treating and breaking advertising laws on election day.

He said at the same time as he registered his electoral petition his pension was stopped.

Mr Cecil said it is no longer an uncommon event to be blacklisted if you oppose the government.

This is an outright abuse of power, and almost certainly illegal. Sadly, it has become common on Nauru. There have been other incidents of pensions being cut, or people sacked, for opposing the government. But I guess that's what happens when you provide politicians with vast amounts of rortable Australian gulag money: they'll do anything to keep it.

Australia's fraudluent gulag-guards

In addition to exposing torture, neglect and child sexual abuse, the Nauru Files have also exposed something else: pervasive fraud by Australia's gulag-guards, Wilson Security:

Self-harm and sexual abuse incident reports filed on Nauru were routinely altered and downgraded in seriousness by the security company tasked with protecting asylum seekers on the island, new documents reveal.

Save the Children, one of the major agencies in the detention centre, protested that they were “usually downgraded without any clear justification”. A spokeswoman for Wilson Security said the company followed the reporting guidelines established by Australia’s immigration department and denied that incident reports are systematically downgraded in breach of the guidelines.

The reason? Simple:

Critical incidents must be reported verbally within 30 minutes and in writing within three hours. Major incidents must be reported verbally within an hour and within six hours in writing. Minor incidents don’t require a verbal report. A written report only needs to be filed within 24 hours. Timeframes for reporting incidents to the department are extremely important because failures to meet these deadlines can trigger financial penalties.

Those financial penalties are up to $80,000 per incident. Downgrading incidents extends the timeline and allows Wilson to escape the penalty. Of course, they're ripping off the Australian taxpayer, but that's just what happens when you give a contractor control over the metric they will be judged by.

It also of course helps cover up just how awful Nauru is, and how many people are tortured, sexually abused, or try to kill themselves there. Which is convenient for Australia's politicians, which is perhaps why they don't bother looking too closely at whether Wilson is really adhering to their contract.

The real crime on nauru is the torture and abuse and coverup thereof, but this just makes it an example of toxic privatisation as well.

Australia's gulag guards lied to Parliament

Yesterday the Guardian released more than 2,000 leaked incident reports from Australia's refugee concentration camp on Nauru. One of the revelations? Their gulag guards Wilson Security lied to Parliament about the number of sexual assaults that happened under their watch:

The Guardian can also reveal that some of the incidents disclosed in the logs in 2014 and 2015 were not reported by Wilson Security when it was asked to provide materials to an Australian parliamentary inquiry into Nauru in 2015.

An Australian Senate inquiry examined conditions and allegations of abuse at the centre. Wilson Security was asked by Hanson-Young for details of all known incidents or allegations of sexual assault, child abuse and assaults on minors.

The company later provided a table of reports of sexual abuse and child abuse to the Senate.

But the Guardian’s analysis shows the reports provided by Wilson Security to parliament are incomplete and that incidents that occurred several months before the hearing were not reported. Although not every allegation will necessarily be proved, the documents Hanson-Young requested concerned allegations, not proven offences.

At least 16 serious cases of child abuse and sexual assault were not disclosed by Wilson Security to the Senate. The sexual assault allegations not reported include:

Wilson Security is in denial, but the files don't lie. And they should be facing contempt of parliament charges for it.

Don't buy Australian

Don't like Australia's torture and systematic neglect of refugees in Pacific island concentration camps? Want them to end this environment of self-harm, despair, and sexual abuse and accept their responsibilities under the refugee convention? If you're Australian, you can try voting for those outcomes. If you're not, then there's really only one thing you can do: don't buy Australian.

Buying Australian goods and supporting Australian companies supplies the Australian government with tax revenue - tax revenue it spends on the torture and abuse of refugees. Refusing to buy Australian or support Australians with your business reduces that revenue. It also ensures you are not complicit in supporting these crimes against humanity.

Boycott campaigns have a mixed record. But they were successful against apartheid South Africa, and (judging by the intense Israeli reaction) are being successful against Israel. At the least, they de-legitimise behaviour and make it clear it is unacceptable to the global community. Australia's behaviour is unacceptable - and they need to know that. So, don't buy Australian, and let the companies you have stopped buying from - Arnotts, Harvey-Norman, Jacob's Creek, Holden, whatever - know about it. Because while you can't do much to change Australian government policy, they can, and will if it starts to hurt their bottom line.