and to allow reasonable time for the Pender Bay
detainees to obtain legal representation to enable
them to comment on the decision.
author at Villawood in September 1990. The
Commission filed formal submissions on his behalf
on 24 March and on 13 April 1991 but, because of
new Determination of Refugee Status Committee
regulations in force since December 1990, all
applications had to be reassessed by Immigration
Department desk officers. On 26 April 1991, the
Commission was given two weeks to reply to the
new assessments; replies were filed on 13 May 1991.
On 15 May 1991, the Minister's delegate rejected the
author's application.
2.8 Early in 1992, the Federal Immigration
Department contracted the Refugee Council of
Australia to act as legal counsel for asylum-seekers
held at Port Hedland. On 4 February 1992, Council
lawyers started to interview inmates and, on 3 March
1992, the Council transmitted a response to the
Refugee Status Review Committee's decision on the
author's behalf to the Minister's delegate. On 6 April
1992, the author and several other Pender Bay
detainees were informed that the Minister's delegate
had refused their refugee status applications.
Undertakings were immediately sought from the
Immigration Department that none of the detainees
would be deported until they had had the possibility
of challenging the decision in the Federal Court of
Australia; such undertakings were refused. Later on
6 April, however, the author obtained an injunction
in the Federal Court, Darwin, which prevented the
implementation of the decision. On 13 April 1992,
the Minister for Immigration ordered the delegate's
decision to be withdrawn, on account of an alleged
error in the decision-making process. The effect of
that decision was to remove the case from the
jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
2.4 On 20 May 1991, the author and other
detainees were told that their cases had been
rejected, that they had 28 days to appeal, and that
they would be transferred to Darwin, several
thousand kilometres away in the Northern Territory.
A copy of the rejection letter was given to them, but
interpretation was not made available. At this
moment, the detainees believed that they were being
returned to Cambodia. During the transfer, no one
was allowed to talk to the other detainees, and
permission to make telephone calls was refused. At
no time was the New South Wales Legal Aid
Commission informed of the removal of its clients
from its jurisdiction.
2.5 The author was then transferred to Curragundi
Camp, located 85 km outside Darwin. The site has
been described as "totally unacceptable" for a
refugee detention centre by the Australian Human
Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner, as it is
flood-prone during the wet season. More
importantly, as a result of the move to the Northern
Territory, contact between the author and the New
South Wales Legal Aid Commission was cut off.
2.9 On 14 April 1992, Federal Court proceedings
were abandoned, and lawyers for the Immigration
Department assured the court that a revised report on
the situation in Cambodia would be made available
to the Refugee Council of Australia by the
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade within two
weeks. Meanwhile, the author had instructed his
lawyer to continue with an application to the Federal
Court, to seek release from detention; a hearing was
scheduled for 7 May 1992 in the Federal Court at
Melbourne.
2.6 On 11 June 1991, the Northern Territory
Legal Aid Commission filed an application with the
Refugee Status Review Committee (which had
replaced the Determination of Refugee Status
Commission), requesting a review of the refusal to
grant refugee status to the author and the other
Pender Bay detainees. On 6 August 1991, the author
was moved to Berrimah Camp, closer to Darwin, and
from there, on 21 October 1991, to Port Hedland
Detention Centre, approximately 2,000 km away in
Western Australia. As a result of the latter transfer,
the author lost contact with his legal representatives
in the Northern Territory Legal Aid Commission.
2.10 On 5 May 1992, the Australian Parliament
passed the Migration Amendment Act (1992), which
amended the 1958 Migration Act by insertion of a
new division 4B, which defined the author and
others in situations similar to his as "designated
persons". Section 54R stipulated: "a court is not to
order the release from custody of a designated
person". On 22 May 1992, the author instituted
proceedings in the High Court of Australia, seeking
a declaratory judgement that the relevant provisions
of the Migration Amendment Act were invalid.
2.7 On 5 December 1991, the Refugee Status
Review Committee rejected all of the Pender Bay
applications for refugee status, including the
author's. The detainees were not informed of the
decisions until letters dated 22 January 1992 were
transmitted to their former representatives on the
Northern Territory Legal Aid Commission. On
29 January, the Commission addressed a letter to the
Committee, requesting it to reconsider its decision
2.11 The revised report of the Department of
Foreign Affairs and Trade, promised for the end of
April 1992, was not finalized until 8 July 1992; on
27 July 1992, the Refugee Council of Australia
forwarded a response to the update to the
Immigration Department and, on 25 August 1992,
the Refugee Status Review Committee once more
recommended dismissal of the author's application
90
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents