Notes

Countries like Australia have very strict asylum seeker laws, but I am here to argue that asylum seekers should not be held in mandatory detention. By popular definition, an asylum seeker is a person that has left their own country and has a pending request for a sanctuary in another country which has yet to be processed. They have no other choice other than to leave their countries of origin to avoid some form of conflict including war and prosecution. How can we allow ourselves to imprison these broken victims of unknown terrors? We have no way of knowing what they have been through and therefore they should not be sentenced to a life in detention with little chance of getting out. There are a number of alternatives to closed immigration detention such as community detentions and bridging visas. These alternatives have little to no negative impacts as a whole and avoid the negative effects that plague the closed mandatory detention system.
Abusive and inhumane treatment of the majority of the asylum seekers are extremely common in mandatory detention. There have been numerous reports of multiple breaches of basic human rights. As a matter of fact, detention centres have become almost infamous for their abusive methods and ways due to a number of cases that clearly illustrate this extreme behaviour. A prime example is Australia’s various detention centres located in the far off Christmas and Manus Islands. Let me tell you a story. It is the late August of 2014. Hamid Khazaei was a 24 year old Iranian man, who had lived on Manus island for just under a year, seeking refuge as many others had before him. Suddenly, he developed an infection on his leg which required treatment as soon as possible. The antibiotics that were provided by the island, were unable to stop the infection and as a result, it required that Hamid be sent away to the mainland of Australia and receive medical treatment. Unfortunately, it took over 5 hours before he would be evacuated to Port Moresby due to failure to communicate between the Department of Immigration and the Border Protection of the seriousness of the situation. Later, Hamid was sent to Brisbane to get treatment but unfortunately he died in the Brisbane Mater Hospital. This is just one story out of many more, and it clearly illustrates the sheer neglect and carelessness that is to be expected in detention centres. Considering there were over 11 491 people seeking asylum in Australia in only 2011, is it our duty to subject them to these barbaric conditions?
Self harm, suicide, sexual and physical abuse are basically commonplace in a number of detention camps. Imagine a life being subject to constant abuse by the people around you. Imagine a life centred around doing the same basic tasks over and over again. Imagine a life confined in a “prison” of sorts where you are forced to endure it for the rest of your life. Well, over a significant percentage of the 20 000 asylum seekers experience exactly what I just described. They don’t need to imagine. As they are subject to poor treatment and constant harassment and abuse, their mental health starts to dictate their life. They begin to have anxiety and depression and believe the only way that they can escape is through self harm and suicide. One way or another, they have escaped. It is their reality. Around 40 people have died and an estimated 19 of those deaths were suicides. All these people have committed suicide to take back control in their lives and seek attention for their plight. Don't these people have a right to seek asylum in our countries without being exposed to this harsh treatment that only exacerbates the trauma already induced by their past? The asylum seekers have already been forced to take desperate measures and will continue to take them, so long as nothing about the conditions of these mandatory detention camps changes.
Although I have just presented you with many a bleak and depressing experience shared by asylum seekers who have been put into mandatory detention, however, there is a way to avoid all these negative impacts. Believe it or not, there are actually reliable alternatives to mandatory detention. The first is community detention, which moves asylum seekers to a community, therefore allowing them to live their lives in comfort and does not involve as many restrictions. The asylum seekers will have a curfew and a designated place to sleep but other than a few other restrictions, there would be no need for a constant feeling of imprisonment. There would be no abuse and mistreatment. The other alternative is bridging visas. They are temporary and are very similar to the community detention except, the asylum seekers would have even less restrictions and would be able to work in the host country with a few exceptions. This would drastically decrease many of the problems faced by mandatory detention.
These detention camps have often been compared to concentration camps, and as harsh as it may seem a comparison, there are many parallels between the two. Ranging from neglect for human life, to constant mistreatment and abuse, to suicide, it is obvious that asylum seekers should not be held in mandatory detention, especially with a reliable alternative at hand. I urge the audience to remember that seeking asylum is a human right and I believe that it is not our right to take that away from them. Thank you.