Proposed Australian immigration powers would allow guards 'to beat asylum seekers to death' in detention centres'

A former Supreme Court judge of the Australian state of Victoria has warned that guards at immigration detention centres will in effect be allowed to “beat asylum seekers to death” under a proposed amendment to an migration bill.

During a Senate hearing on changes to Australia’s Migration Act, Stephen Charles QC said that an extension to the power of guards in detention centres would allow officers to use “reasonable force against any person” in order to protect the life, health or safety of people in detention or to maintain the good order, peace, or security of a detention centre.

However, Mr Charles told the hearing that the proposed measures would “inevitably encourage violence” against asylum seekers, the Guardian reported.

“These amendments will authorise detention centre guards to beat asylum seekers to death if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to save either themselves or another person from serious harm,” he said, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

He went on to warn that the proposed powers would give officers immunity currently granted to state and federal police forces, despite their lower level of training.

Using the example of Walter Scott, a black man who was fatally shot in the back by a white police officer, Mr Charles warned against bringing the “reasonable belief” test to Australia.

Mr Charles told the Senate hearing the new powers were “a joke in extremely bad taste” and advised it to “can” the amendments and “start from scratch”, ABC News reported.

Gillian Triggs, the president of the Australian Human Rights Commission, told the Senate a bar on proceedings would make it “virtually impossible” to bring forward any action, because of the difficulty of demonstrating bad faith in legal proceedings.

Greens senator, Sarah Hanson-Young, said her party would be opposing the legislation in the Senate and urging cross-benchers to do the same.

“With the high levels of secrecy in detention centres, giving guards unchecked powers to use force is a recipe for further cover ups of abuse and misconduct” she said, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

The damning comments come after the release of the Moss review, which highlighted allegations of sexual and physical assault against asylum seekers, including children, at the Nauru centre.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/proposed-australian-immigration-powers-would-allow-guards-to-beat-asylum-seekers-to-death-in-detention-centres-10183208.html

FGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

risingsun wrote:

A former Supreme Court judge of the Australian state of Victoria has warned that guards at immigration detention centres will in effect be allowed to “beat asylum seekers to death” under a proposed amendment to an migration bill.

During a Senate hearing on changes to Australia’s Migration Act, Stephen Charles QC said that an extension to the power of guards in detention centres would allow officers to use “reasonable force against any person” in order to protect the life, health or safety of people in detention or to maintain the good order, peace, or security of a detention centre.

However, Mr Charles told the hearing that the proposed measures would “inevitably encourage violence” against asylum seekers, the Guardian reported.

“These amendments will authorise detention centre guards to beat asylum seekers to death if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to save either themselves or another person from serious harm,” he said, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

He went on to warn that the proposed powers would give officers immunity currently granted to state and federal police forces, despite their lower level of training.

Using the example of Walter Scott, a black man who was fatally shot in the back by a white police officer, Mr Charles warned against bringing the “reasonable belief” test to Australia.

Mr Charles told the Senate hearing the new powers were “a joke in extremely bad taste” and advised it to “can” the amendments and “start from scratch”, ABC News reported.

Gillian Triggs, the president of the Australian Human Rights Commission, told the Senate a bar on proceedings would make it “virtually impossible” to bring forward any action, because of the difficulty of demonstrating bad faith in legal proceedings.

Greens senator, Sarah Hanson-Young, said her party would be opposing the legislation in the Senate and urging cross-benchers to do the same.

“With the high levels of secrecy in detention centres, giving guards unchecked powers to use force is a recipe for further cover ups of abuse and misconduct” she said, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

The damning comments come after the release of the Moss review, which highlighted allegations of sexual and physical assault against asylum seekers, including children, at the Nauru centre.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/proposed-australian-immigration-powers-would-allow-guards-to-beat-asylum-seekers-to-death-in-detention-centres-10183208.html

FGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well Sassy I don't see the problem with using reasonable force to protect oneself & ones property.As I understand it,in the UK anyone can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others,as long as they can justify their actions.

The majority of coppers in the UK use reasonable force to some degree everyday when dealing with the public.Yes I know sometimes some get it wrong but that's another matter.

Regarding the Australian prison officers,what level of force should they be expected to use if they can't use reasonable force?

SOUNDS like yet another anti-Oz Independent hatemonger has got ahead of herself there, promoting her Chardonnay & Red Bull inspired daydreaming as if it were some kind of reality...

CAN'T get much further away from Manus Island (New Guinea) and Niui than Melbourne (home of the Vic. Supreme Court..) without splashing about in or on the great Southern Ocean..

OBVIOUSLY that particular "journalist" still thinks that Australia is still a British colony as well. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that so many of those detention centre guards are former English prison guards and police officers ?  Provided courtesy of everyone's favourite private prisons, security and mercenaries supplier GS4 ~ who not only supply unliceensed and unqualified guards to the detention centres, but look after our half dozen SuperMax prisons as well..  

Lone Wolf wrote:

SOUNDS like yet another anti-Oz Independent hatemonger has got ahead of herself there, promoting her Chardonnay & Red Bull inspired daydreaming as if it were some kind of reality...

CAN'T get much further away from Manus Island (New Guinea) and Niui than Melbourne (home of the Vic. Supreme Court..) without splashing about in or on the great Southern Ocean..

OBVIOUSLY that particular "journalist" still thinks that Australia is still a British colony as well. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that so many of those detention centre guards are former English prison guards and police officers ?  Provided courtesy of everyone's favourite private prisons, security and mercenaries supplier GS4 ~ who not only supply unliceensed and unqualified guards to the detention centres, but look after our half dozen SuperMax prisons as well..  

Worst prisons in the UK are G4S ones

I see the emigrants are blaming the British again, WHINGERS

We have Tony Abbott's RW gov't of course they are proposing laws to allow them to beat poor foreigners to death

I have always admired some of Australians immigration policies (from what I've been told by a friend who loves there) but this, if true, is preposterous!

DON'T forget that Britain now has an official Tory-fascist government policy that it is totally acceptable to shoot any foreigners, or foreign looking persons, whenever a police officer/politician/lobbyist/journalist/Jewish blogger fears that said foreign-looking person may harm them in some way, or even look sideways at them, even if innocently going about their own business half a mile away from said scaredy-cats...

ALL AS a result of those untrained 'anti-terrorist' police murdering that Brazilian student in a train carriage ~ then to see them exonerated by their bosses, after the British government and their popular press Overlords had decreed it a "righteous killing" ~ on the grounds that idiotic scaredy-pants British cops are routinely afraid of their own shadows..

AND IF you're silly enough to give a bunch of untrained para-military idiots without a clue a nice little arsenal of SMGs, your country should then expect a few innocent people to be subsequently killed at random. Even more so if they are in any way a little foreign looking !  

Total load of bollocks from a BRIT hating thick as shit know all Aussie racist.Go stick your head down your "dunny".

Lone Wolf wrote:

DON'T forget that Britain now has an official Tory-fascist government policy that it is totally acceptable to shoot any foreigners, or foreign looking persons, whenever a police officer/politician/lobbyist/journalist/Jewish blogger fears that said foreign-looking person may harm them in some way, or even look sideways at them, even if innocently going about their own business half a mile away from said scaredy-cats...

ALL AS a result of those untrained 'anti-terrorist' police murdering that Brazilian student in a train carriage ~ then to see them exonerated by their bosses, after the British government and their popular press Overlords had decreed it a "righteous killing" ~ on the grounds that idiotic scaredy-pants British cops are routinely afraid of their own shadows..

AND IF you're silly enough to give a bunch of untrained para-military idiots without a clue a nice little arsenal of SMGs, your country should then expect a few innocent people to be subsequently killed at random. Even more so if they are in any way a little foreign looking !  

Oh dear,you've been at the loopy juice again.

Lone Wolf wrote:ALL AS a result of those untrained 'anti-terrorist' police murdering that Brazilian student in a train carriage ~ then to see them exonerated by their bosses, after the British government and their popular press Overlords had decreed it a "righteous killing" ~ on the grounds that idiotic scaredy-pants British cops are routinely afraid of their own shadows.

Yes, that was the first sign we had that Britain was a lot weaker than had been thought. They weren't prepared.

Original Quill wrote:

Lone Wolf wrote:ALL AS a result of those untrained 'anti-terrorist' police murdering that Brazilian student in a train carriage ~ then to see them exonerated by their bosses, after the British government and their popular press Overlords had decreed it a "righteous killing" ~ on the grounds that idiotic scaredy-pants British cops are routinely afraid of their own shadows.

Yes, that was the first sign we had that Britain was a lot weaker than had been thought.  They weren't prepared.

I thought they did a pretty good job of killing Mr.Menendes.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes, that was the first sign we had that Britain was a lot weaker than had been thought.  They weren't prepared.

I thought they did a pretty good job of killing Mr.Menendes.

The execution of the job was carried out with skill, but it sadly was poor intelligence that led to an innocent person being in fact murdered.

Nemesis wrote:

Shady wrote:

I thought they did a pretty good job of killing Mr.Menendes.

The execution of the job was carried out with skill, but it sadly was poor intelligence that led to an innocent person being in fact murdered.

Yes...that is the point.

As we have seen in the years since, anyone can spray an urban area with AR-15 rounds.  The trick is to be smart about it.  I do think that is the popularity of the film, The Sniper: less is more.

Killing Sr. Menendes was just a bunch of scared men, trying to pound their chests. They still end up in cages.

Original Quill wrote:

Nemesis wrote:

The execution of the job was carried out with skill, but it sadly was poor intelligence that led to an innocent person being in fact murdered.

Yes...that is the point.

As we have seen in the years since, anyone can spray an urban area with AR-15 rounds.  The trick is to be smart about it.  I do think that is the popularity of the film, The Sniper: less is more.

Killing Sr. Menendes was just a bunch of scared men, trying to pound their chests.  They still end up in cages.

I think you're being a bit too emotive about it Quill.Unfortunately,the UK is at war with radical islam & again unfortunately Mr.Menendes was collateral damage in that war.

And whatever the standard of the intelligence,the guys & girls on the ground were doing their level best to keep people safe & prevent another Muslim outrage.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yes...that is the point.

As we have seen in the years since, anyone can spray an urban area with AR-15 rounds.  The trick is to be smart about it.  I do think that is the popularity of the film, The Sniper: less is more.

Killing Sr. Menendes was just a bunch of scared men, trying to pound their chests.  They still end up in cages.

I think you're being a bit too emotive about it Quill.Unfortunately,the UK is at war with radical islam & again unfortunately Mr.Menendes was collateral damage in that war.

And whatever the standard of the intelligence,the guys & girls on the ground were doing their level best to keep people safe & prevent another Muslim outrage.

I think you are being even more over emotional.

Yes the Uk is at war with radical Islam.

Its not at war with Brazilian students who are not even Muslim.
Keeping people safe failed here, because they killed someone who thought he was safe here.

Do you not understand that?

Nemesis wrote:

Shady wrote:

I think you're being a bit too emotive about it Quill.Unfortunately,the UK is at war with radical islam & again unfortunately Mr.Menendes was collateral damage in that war.

And whatever the standard of the intelligence,the guys & girls on the ground were doing their level best to keep people safe & prevent another Muslim outrage.

I think you are being even more over emotional.

Yes the Uk is at war with radical Islam.

Its not at war with Brazilian students who are not even Muslim.
Keeping people safe failed here, because they killed someone who thought he was safe here.

Do you not understand that?

No.

Shady wrote:

Nemesis wrote:

I think you are being even more over emotional.

Yes the Uk is at war with radical Islam.

Its not at war with Brazilian students who are not even Muslim.
Keeping people safe failed here, because they killed someone who thought he was safe here.

Do you not understand that?

No.

Yes I understand your sentiments.

The realisation you lack common sense must be daunting, hence your reply.

Seriously, if I was you, check yourself in for some help

Shady wrote:I think you're being a bit too emotive about it Quill.Unfortunately,the UK is at war with radical islam & again unfortunately Mr.Menendes was collateral damage in that war.

Good luck with that war. Fortunately--through fate, or a god looking over us--we have stayed out of that one.

Dr. Obama extricated us from Iraq, and Republicans can't get it together enough to start another war. Lol.

Tho...undoubtedly, it would involve Muslims somehow. Gotta have a racial component in all of our wars, ya know.

Original Quill wrote:

Shady wrote:I think you're being a bit too emotive about it Quill.Unfortunately,the UK is at war with radical islam & again unfortunately Mr.Menendes was collateral damage in that war.

Good luck with that war.  Fortunately--through fate, or a god looking over us--we have stayed out of that one.  

Dr. Obama extricated us from Iraq, and Republicans can't get it together enough to start another war.  Lol.  

Tho...undoubtedly, it would involve Muslims somehow.  Gotta have a racial component in all of our wars, ya know.

Quill......9/11??

Nemisus wrote:Its not at war with Brazilian students who are not even Muslim.
Keeping people safe failed here, because they killed someone who thought he was safe here.

I think that hits the mark. We are shooting ourselves up the arse. The whole Islam thing has got us so squirrelly we are giving up all we hold dear in our lives. Serves us right, frankly. Just what ISIL ordered up.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Good luck with that war.  Fortunately--through fate, or a god looking over us--we have stayed out of that one.  

Dr. Obama extricated us from Iraq, and Republicans can't get it together enough to start another war.  Lol.  

Tho...undoubtedly, it would involve Muslims somehow.  Gotta have a racial component in all of our wars, ya know.

Quill......9/11??

19-Men?  A police action, at best.  We would have been much better off if we had allowed the New York City police to handle it.  But you know Republicans...kidnap, rape torture, kill...plus $17-trillion for the party.  Conservatives just wanna have fun...

America, in fact, never responded to 9/11.  The Iraq war was on the table already, and the Bush/Cheney cabal merely co-opted that incident to start their war.  As I said, Dr. Obama got us out of that one.

Shady wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Good luck with that war.  Fortunately--through fate, or a god looking over us--we have stayed out of that one.  

Dr. Obama extricated us from Iraq, and Republicans can't get it together enough to start another war.  Lol.  

Tho...undoubtedly, it would involve Muslims somehow.  Gotta have a racial component in all of our wars, ya know.

Quill......9/11??

Was a bunch of mainly Saudi terrorists.

Do not get me wrong religion is a problem, but casting all as evil really is rather stupid as you seem to be doing.

The problem is that some can easily interpret a view to commit violence and is something Muslims need to deal with such hate.

Nemesis wrote:

Shady wrote:

Quill......9/11??

Was a bunch of mainly Saudi terrorists.

Do not get me wrong religion is a problem, but casting all as evil really is rather stupid as you seem to be doing.

The problem is that some can easily interpret a view to commit violence and is something Muslims need to deal with such hate.

You need to take a nap.

Shady wrote:

Nemesis wrote:

Was a bunch of mainly Saudi terrorists.

Do not get me wrong religion is a problem, but casting all as evil really is rather stupid as you seem to be doing.

The problem is that some can easily interpret a view to commit violence and is something Muslims need to deal with such hate.

You need to take a nap.

Well if we are going off mental age, I would say you need them 12 times a day.

eddie wrote:I have always admired some of Australians immigration policies (from what I've been told by a friend who loves there) but this, if true, is preposterous!

it seems true, they have done some pretty other shitty thing like ban reporters from reporting refugee numbers and gagged navy officials that are pissed at having to do this shit.

both sides have been kicking boat people like a political football. but RW tend to be tougher

the problem it is based on a false assumption that people know or care what the procedure is for getting to Australia, they keep increasing punishments but it makes almost no difference because the people are escaping hard lives and trying to reach paradise.. this is why i think anyone that think you can make a punishment bad enough where people wont try should get kicked out since they obviously don't love Australia enough. this is paradise there will always be people smart enough to realize it is worth any risk to get here