- Asylum seekers allegedly kept in windowless rooms
- Family members separated against their will
- Interpreters not provided for questioning by authorities
- Read the documents in full below.
Documents lodged with the High Court state that the government’s obligations of non-refoulement, or not returning asylum seekers to countries from which they're fled, don’t apply “unless or until that person reaches Australia’s territorial sea”.
The government defence team lodged the documents as part of a high court case examining the interception of the asylum seeker vessel which left India in late June carrying more than 150 passengers.
The documents, lodged in defence of the government, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison and Defence Minister David Johnson, also confirm that the 157 asylum seekers have been separated from families while being detained on board an Australian naval vessel.
Lawyers for the asylum seekers allege that the detainees have been kept behind locked doors in windowless rooms.
Lawyers for the asylum seekers allege that the group of detainees – which includes 86 Sri Lankan Tamils and “a substantial number” of children – have been separated from family against their will and kept behind locked doors in windowless rooms.
The government says the asylum seekers have been separated into three rooms and are unable to leave the Australian vessel without permission from authorities.
“Families cannot be accommodated together while maintaining appropriate separation between men, women and children,” the defence document read.
The government also confirmed that the plaintiff does not wish to return to Sri Lanka, but desputed allegations that the only information asked of the passengers has been their name, date of birth and address.
From India to Australia
Documents lodged on behalf of the asylum seekers allege that the group left Pondicherry in India on, or about, June 13.
Their boat developed an oil leak on or about June 26, prompting a call to the Australian Maritime Rescue Authority, which notified the authorities.
The government dispatched one or more navy vessels on June 29 and intercepted the vessel in Australia’s contiguous zone that day, when it was allegedly “approximately 27km from Christmas Island, which is part of Australia”.
The contiguous zone is deemed to be between 12 and 24 nautical miles from the baselines of Australia.
In the document, the government also confirmed maritime officers boarded the boat, detained its passengers and transferred them to the Australian vessel.
The asylum seekers continue to be detained by Australian authorities and that “the process of taking the plaintiff and the other persons from the Indian vessel to a place is not yet complete”.
Documents lodged by the defence team outlined that a fire on the boat had caused “irreparable damage” to the engine and rendered it unseaworthy.
The asylum seekers continue to be detained by Australian authorities and that “the process of taking the plaintiff and the other persons from the Indian vessel to a place is not yet complete”.
The documents also argued that the boat should not be referred to as “the asylum vessel” and argued that such references “should not be taken as an admission that that vessel or any of the people on that vessel claim or are entitled to claim asylum of any kind”.
The asylum seekers have told lawyers that they are on the high seas, but otherwise don’t know where they are.
They say they don’t want to be there, but can’t leave.
The detainees, who claim to be refugees, have alleged they have no freedom of movement and that personal property has been taken off them.
Few speak English, but they allegedly are yet to be provided with a qualified Tamil interpreter.
The case is due to return to the High Court this afternoon for a directions hearing ahead of coming before the full bench of the High Court in coming weeks.
Share
