Singapore turns away Myanmar boat refugees

First off, apologies.

Firstly, apologies for my long silence on this blog, there really is no excuse other than to say that life has been extremely busy of late (yes, for the last six months…oops). Safe to say, I hope to make this up with lots of posts over the holiday season…

As we approach the end of the year, I thought I would post on Myanmar, a country that has seen so much change over the past 12 months, and which I have regularly covered in my blog. Last month, I was lucky enough to undertake a trip to Yangon to meet with civil society, business and government officials to see the change for myself. I was amazed by the vibrancy and busyness of the city, something I was told has only really existed for the past 18 months, since government reforms began.

Many challenges remain, including the Rohingya issue, which the Myanmar government is under increasing pressure to resolve. Having spilt over the borders to India and Bangladesh already, Rohingya refugees are beginning to seek asylum elsewhere, risking their lives on flimsy boats to try and make it to the shores of Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia.

As such, I was disappointed to hear last week, that Singapore refused entry to 40 stranded boat passengers after their vessel sank off the coast of Myanmar on December 5 and sought to dock in Singapore waters.

Stranded

It is not clear whether the passengers were Rohingya, a group that has been displaced by recent ethnic violence in Myanmar’s Rakhine state.

The Nosco Victory, a cargo ship that rescued the group from the sea 30 hours after their boat sank, said that the passengers claimed to be from Myanmar but were not carrying identification papers at the time they boarded.

After sailing for 7 days, the Nosco Victory was hoping to dock in Singapore on Sunday, but was turned away after the country’s Maritime and Port Authority denied the ship entry. The reason for this was that those rescued “did not appear to be persons eligible to enter Singapore,” and that the captain had ignored advice from Indian authorities to take the survivors to the nearest port of safety, according to the Authority.

Refugee Protection

The incident has set off concerns that Southeast Asian governments are wary about accepting asylum seekers, afraid of sparking off an increased exodus from Myanmar.

It has also highlighted the weak regional protections for refugees in Southeast Asia. Apart from Cambodia and the Philippines, no other Southeast Asian state is a  signatory to the United Nations Convention on Refugees, which provides a basic framework for protecting people escaping persecution. The convention prohibits signatories from expelling recognized refugees, with some exceptions, or punishing refugees for illegal entry.

Singapore has previously said that it cannot accept Rohingya refugees should they attempt to land, but that it would help them depart for another country. However, it is not clear what assistance was given in this case, as the incident was not covered by the local media. Singapore has previously said that its inability to take in refugees and asylum seekers is due to its small size and limited resources.

While not naming any particular country, a spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees urged the country as the nearest port to accept the passengers, saying that the group should be allowed to “safely disembark on humanitarian grounds.”

A Growing Problem

The latest incident follows the sinking of at least two other boats carrying refugees from Myanmar in the past two months, including the capsizing of a boat of 130 refugees fleeing violence in October, when all passengers drowned.

The government of Myanmar has been criticised for its handling of the Rakhine conflict, in which as many as 150 000 refugees have been displaced. Although many Rohingya have lived in the country for generations, they have been viewed as illegal immigrants by the population and face widespread hostility.

The Nosco Victory is now reported to have left Singapore’s coast. It was due to arrive in Indonesia on Saturday the 15th, but Indonesian authorities at the time seemed to cool to welcoming them.

These recent disasters draw attention to the tricky subject of asylum seekers and refugees in the region. With the recent signing of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD), ASEAN states are under pressure to prove that the document holds some weight, after intense criticism by civil society groups and human rights activists. That said, although the AHRD makes mention of many civil and political, as well as economic social and cultural rights, it fails to specifically mention refugees and asylum seekers, another indication that the issue remains contentious between countries.

Report: Singapore Rejects Myanmar Shipwreck Survivors (WSJ, 13 December 2012)

Report: UN plea to take Burmese refugees (The Age, 13 December 2012)

Report: Singapore cannot accept Rohingya refugees (CNA, 24 March 2009)

Australia’s asylum seekers: fate pending

An Australian proposal to reopen an immigration detention centre on a remote Papua New Guinea Island was approved by Papua New Guinea’s cabinet on Thursday. The centre will be run and paid for by the Australian government.

The announcement comes amidst a legal row over an Australian refugee swap deal with Malaysia, also known as the “Malaysian Solution” which would see Australia send 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia in return for 4,000 processed refugees over the next four years.

The controversial agreement hit a roadblock earlier this week when Australia’s High Court stopped authorities from deporting the first a boat-load of asylum seekers until a full hearing could be held. A lawyer representing the asylum seekers said the court had found there was a “serious question” over whether the government had the power to expel those seeking safe haven in Australia, including children, to Malaysia.

Critics, including Amnesty International have argued that refugees are often mistreated in Malaysia, which has not signed the UN Refugee Convention.

Court suspends Australia-Malaysia Refugee swap [AFP, 8 August 2011]

An Australian asylum camp in Papua New Guinea was part of the so-called “Pacific Solution” until 2008 many Australians supported the policy, but rights groups condemned it and accused Australia of failing to meet its obligations under refugee conventions and the camp was closed following the election of PM Kevin Rudd. Both PNG and the island nation of Nauru, which also housed asylum seekers, received millions of dollars in aid as part of the deal.

Report: Papua New Guinea agrees to reopen Australia asylum camp [BBC News, 11 Aug 2011]

Australian Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said the re-opening of the centre would not replace, but “complement” the government’s Malaysian refugee swap. Australia’s High Court will hear the challenge to the Malaysia deal on 22 August.

The two latest policies by the Australian government follow an increase in the number of people arriving by boat in recent months, prompting public calls for a tougher response.

Australia’s government seems to be at a loss as to how to tackle the issue of asylum seekers. While its Malaysian proposal received ridicule from opposition leaders, it has become a hot topic among commentators at home and abroad.

Some such as Dr. John Stuyfbergen, an academic at Australia’s La Trobe University, say that people have rushed to condemn the “Malaysian Solution” too quickly, emphasising that the refugee situation is “a practical problem that needs a pragmatic solution”.

Stuyfbergen critiques coverage of the plan, cautioning that “terms such as “people trading” and deporting “little kiddies to Malaysia” slant the debate and the results before we even know whether the “Malaysian solution” is, in the end, correct in the fair treatment of the transferred refugees and effective in crushing the people smugglers’ syndicates”

Dr. Stuyfbergen argues that the main aim of the Malaysian Solution, to stop people smugglers from transporting vulnerable asylum seekers to Australian shores has been lost in the political debate surrounding the issue.

Analysis: Let’s give the Malaysia solution a chance to work [Sydney Morning Herald, 12 Aug 2011]

Nick Bryant, the BBC’s Sydney correspondant, has a view I more readily support, which is that the “Malaysian Solution” is an ill-thought out plan by policy makers, who somehow failed to notice crucial weaknesses before it was adopted by the government.

Firstly, the proposal did not have the backing of the UN’s refugee agency, prompting questions of human rights violations.

Secondly, when it emerged that unaccompanied children would be included in the swap deal,  the government faced more accusations of callousness and cruelty.

Finally, the parallel idea of posting on youtube videos of asylum seekers arriving and subsequently being sent away was accused of adding salt to a wound by using vulnerable people as props to deter people abroad.

Analysis: Australia fails to find an asylum solution [BBC, 9 August 2011]

The issue of asylum seekers in Australia is not a simple one, but what is clear from these latest events, is that any future plan should involve deeper thinking and greater consensus building than that which has been attempted so far.