The treatment of asylum seekers who travel to Australia by boat has been firmly set on the political agenda in the lead up to the federal election.
But there are concerns about the feasibility of proposed government policies in relation to asylum seekers at sea.
Legal experts say the Coalition proposal to turn back boats to Indonesia could see Australia breaching international law, and potentially breaching Indonesia's sovereignty.
Hannah Sinclair reports.
"It's about this nation saying to the world, we are a generous open-hearted people taking more refugees on a per capita basis than any nation except Canada. We have a proud record of welcoming people from 140 different nations. But we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come."
That was former Prime Minister John Howard speaking in October 2001, two months after the so-called Tampa affair and just before the re-election of his Coalition government.
Mr Howard's asylum policy included a special operation in the period on either side of the 2001 election, when some boats were returned to Indonesia.
Kevin Rudd disbanded much of Mr Howard's policy in his first stint as Prime Minister, after the 2007 election.
The Labor government has since restored one key aspect - the overseas processing of asylum seekers.
But Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says the policy of turning back boats should also be revived.
Mr Abbott told the ABC the tough stance could work again.
"The Howard government stopped the boats by, amongst other things, turning boats around. What can be done in the past can be done again in the future."
Some experts say it's doubtful the Howard-era policies were legal under international law at the time.
And Professor Mary Crock, an expert in immigration and refugee law at the University of Sydney, says if they were employed today it's highly likely Australia would be contravening its United Nations obligations.
"The primary problem with the push back policy is that it kills people and involves a breach of the human right to live."
Professor Crock says turning back boats is complicated because Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of The Sea.
"The primary obligation whenever you engage with people who are on the sea is to act in a way that preserves life at sea. That's the primary obligation under the UN convention on the Law of The Sea. To be honest that is the biggest problem with pushing boats back to Indonesia."
International law expert at the Australian National University, Donald Rothwell, says the laws of the sea aren't simple.
Professor Rothwell says there is not doubt Australia can legally stop boats within what's known as the contiguous zone, extending out to a 24 nautical mile limit from the low-water mark on the coastline.
He says Australia could force boats to go back outside the zone.
But, if the boat displays any distress signals once back on the high seas, Professor Rothwell says Australian authorities must act.
"Australia does have obligations under a range of conventions the Safety of Life at Sea Convention, the Search and Rescue Convention. And so if Australia was to abandon the vessel at sea, on the high seas, which was un-seaworthy and was not capable of making any formal voyage, let alone a return voyage to Indonesia, that would certainly be a derogation of Australia's obligations under that particular convention."
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has accused Mr Abbott of potentially risking a diplomatic conflict with Indonesia.
Mr Rudd says the implementation of a 'turn back the boats' policy is risky without Indonesia's support.
"I'm very concerned about whether if Mr Abbott were to become Prime Minister and continues that rhetoric and that posture and actually tries to translate it into reality I really wonder whether he's trying to risk some sort of conflict with Indonesia."
Opposition spokeswoman on foreign affairs, Julie Bishop, told the ABC the claim is inflammatory.
"It is utterly irresponsible and reckless for the Prime Minister of this country to try and use our bilateral relationship with Indonesia for base domestic political purposes."
During Mr Rudd's recent visit to Jakarta, Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono signed a joint communique stating that unilateral action on asylum seekers should be avoided.
The Labor government has interpreted this as an attack on the Coalition's 'turn back boats' policy.
Professor Crock says proceeding with the policy without Indonesia's approval is unwise and could breach Indonesia's sovereignty.
"If Australia goes into the waters of Indonesia without the permission of the Indonesian government they are putting our bilateral relations at risk. There is no doubt about that. My primary concern with push back operations, is the human rights of the people involved. Without the co-operation of Indonesia this is going to be a matter that involves conflict with Indonesia, and that can't be good for the country."
Professor Donald Rothwell says unless the Coalition government has the support of Indonesian authorities, its policy could also contravene international law.
"Well certainly if Indonesia was agreeable to Australian exercising control over vessels bringing asylum seekers to Australia from Indonesia, that would go a long way to resolving legal, political and diplomatic issues. In the absence of such an agreement, I don't at this point in time see how Australia's actions, purported actions in this area, would be consistent with international law."
The Coalition says, in government, it would turn back boats only when it's safe to do so.
Some experts say usually, it wouldn't be safe.
Dr Michael White is a former Australian Navy Lieutenant-Commander, and now an Adjunct Professor at the University of Queensland who has published widely in maritime law and history.
He says the majority of asylum boats that have arrived in Australian waters from Indonesia are not seaworthy.
"And many of these fishing craft in effect who come here don't tow very well. So in theory you can have turn back the boats, but in practice you've got to sort out the refugees from the others. And turning back the boats which has got a very shonky engine, probably not very good navigators, running out of fuel and water, where women and children on board need medical treatment, isn't very practical."
Under the Howard government's turn-back policy in 2001, Australia escorted four asylum seeker boats back to Indonesia.
But another three sank during attempts to intercept them, or to tow them back - with the loss of two lives.
Dr White says for what is achieved, the policy of turning back boats is exceptionally dangerous for the Australian Navy and other border protection forces.
"A willy-nilly* policy of turning back the boats is totally unfair on our naval forces, on our Customs sea-going forces and on our Australian Federal Police forces who are called in to go sea. It is a dangerous and difficult job to board another vessel at sea."
Tony Abbott says other nations have turned back boats from their territorial waters.
He cites the example of the United States Coast Guard turning back boats carrying passengers from Haiti.
But Professor Crock says the situation is different for Australia, particularly as Indonesia is not the country of origin for the majority of passengers on the boats.
"Australia on the other hand, we're a much smaller country taking on a bigger country that is not the source of the asylum seekers. It is a transit country. It's a transit country that has an enormous coastline with so many different islands that the idea of pushing the boats back is quite frankly in my view, in the realm of fantasy."
Immigration Minister Tony Burke acknowledges that Australia could tow asylum seeker boats into international waters that are neither the territorial waters of Australia nor Indonesia.
But he says this wouldn't be practical.
"All you achieve in those circumstances is towing people around in circles around the Indian Ocean. The logic of it just won't work. The only way it would work would be if people smugglers forgot everything that they learnt a decade ago. And we're not so naive as to believe that's the case."
Share
