NGO: Huge gap in treatment of refugees

By SHAILA KOSHY

KUALA LUMPUR: The Human Rights Watch (HRW) has claimed that Australia and Malaysia's refugee swap agreement fails to meet minimal standards for refugee burden-sharing.

“The gap in the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers between Australia and Malaysia remains enormous,” said its refugee programme director Bill Frelick in a letter to the prime ministers of both countries.

On Monday, Australia and Malaysia signed an Arrangement on the Transfer and Resettlement of 800 asylum seekers who arrive in Australia for 4,000 refugees living in Malaysia.

Frelick cited the protection and education of refugee children as a particular concern because the agreement says nothing about the basic principles of protection for unaccompanied children under international law.

“The agreement ignores the special needs of unaccompanied children,” said Frelick.

He added that “saying implementing procedures will come later was no excuse for not spelling out the basic principles in the Arrangement itself”.

He said while the Arrangement says school-age children would be given access to “private education”, it adds that if it was not available or affordable, the children would have access to “informal education.”

Frelick argued that neither private education nor informal education met the standards for the right to free and compulsory primary education in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, of which both Australia and Malaysia are parties.

While HRW acknowledged that Australia's willingness to admit 4,000 more refugees for permanent resettlement was potentially a great humanitarian benefit, it urged the government to separate the agreement from a deal that would deflect people seeking asylum in Australia to another country.

He added that while Malaysia's willingness to recognise a group of asylum seekers as being lawfully present was also a positive development, creating an exception for 800 “swapped” people while 90,000 other refugees and asylum seekers remain “illegal migrants” subject to deportation was unacceptable.