Nauru detention centres a breach of Australian constitution, High Court told

Detaining asylum seekers in the Pacific island of Nauru is not authorised by Australian law or constitution, the lawyer of a Bangladeshi women from Nauru has argued.

A hearing in Canberra on Wednesday for a Bangladeshi woman, who was brought from Nauru to Australia to give birth and seek medical attention, has heightened the issue of asylum seekers detained outside of Australia. The hearing, which lasted for two days, also discussed the constitutionality of the federal government’s funding of detention centres in Nauru and Manus Island. These centres have been subjected to much controversy, including reports of harsh conditions and systemic child abuse. The camps have also been subject to criticism by the United Nations and human rights groups.

The plaintiff’s lawyer, Ron Merkel QC, argued that both Australia and Nauru have a critical role in overseeing the framework of the centre; however, the day-to-day operation as a detention site is an “Australian endeavour.”

The High Court hearings is the first time that Australia’s offshore detention immigration policy will be tested. Detention of asylum seekers has been the backbone of the country’s immigration policy since 2010.

On Monday, Nauru unexpectedly said that 600 asylum seekers in the country would be allowed to move freely and that their applications would be processed this week - a move that has no connections with the High Court case, according to Immigration Minister Peter Dutton.

Over 200 people brought from Nauru and Manus Island to Australia, often to seek medical attention, are now threatened to be sent back to regional processing centres.

Australia has defended its detention policy as a necessity to stop deaths at sea. Genuine refugees processed at the Nauru or Papua New Guinea camps are eligible to settle in Australia.

The country has been vocal about preventing asylum seekers from reaching and settling in the country, and is currently funding asylum camps on Nauru by paying for visas and funding asylum centres. The complaint about the unlawfulness of a detention centre has been disputed, with arguments noting that changes in the Migration Act, which the Australian parliament passed in June, authorises such actions.

Contact the writer at feedback@ibtimes.com.au, or let us know what you think below.