Human rights commissioner raises concerns about NZYQ Nauru resettlement decision

Nauru grants resettlement visas to three people re-detained pending removal from Australia

Human rights commissioner raises concerns about NZYQ Nauru resettlement decision
human rights, NZYQ, Nauru

Lorraine Finlay, Australia’s human rights commissioner, has written to Tony Burke, Australia’s home affairs minister, to request clarity, transparency, and accountability relating to the Australian government’s decision to resettle three members of the NZYQ cohort in Nauru.

The government announced that Nauru granted three individuals, who were re-detained pending removal from Australia, 30-year resettlement visas. These three people would reside in individual facilities with a shared kitchen space in Nauru and would have the rights to work and to move freely around the island.

Finlay said that this announcement lacked detail, brought up serious human rights concerns, and raised questions relating to the rights of the individuals involved, the policy’s broader application to the cohort of around 280 people, and Australia’s compliance with its international legal obligations, according to a media release by the Australian Human Rights Commission.

“Any arrangement needs to be consistent with Australia’s domestic laws and international human rights obligations,” Finlay said. “In particular, the UN Human Rights Committee emphasised in two recent decisions concerning Australia that sending people offshore does not absolve States of their legal obligations towards asylum seekers or absolve them of accountability.”

Questions raised

As per the media release, Finlay asked Burke questions including the following:

  • What were the terms of the agreement between Australia and Nauru?
  • What human rights guarantees did Australia seek and receive relating to safeguards in connection with the treatment of the people resettled in Nauru?
  • Could Nauru impose ongoing monitoring, curfew, and surveillance conditions that Australia’s High Court previously considered unconstitutional in Australia?
  • What would Australia’s ongoing role be in managing, overseeing, and funding this arrangement and the individuals involved?
  • Could the people sent to Nauru be returned to Australia if they breached their resettlement visa, if their visa was cancelled, or if they experienced human rights breaches there?

“The details of this arrangement need to be clarified so that the Australian people can understand how the Australian Government intends to address both existing concerns around community safety in Australia arising from the release of the NZYQ cohort from immigration detention, and the substantial human rights concerns that arise from any attempted outsourcing of Australia’s international obligations,” Finlay said.

At the time of the NZYQ decision in late 2023, Finlay raised certain substantial factors for consideration concerning the government’s policies relating to immigration and asylum seekers.

“These include the right of Australia as a sovereign nation to control its own borders, upholding the integrity of Australia’s immigration system, the right of asylum seekers to seek safety and protection (ensuring that their individual human rights are protected throughout that process), the right of Australians to be safe in their homes and communities, and the need to take strong measures against people smuggling and human trafficking,” Finlay said.