The Federal Court noted that lawyers for Mr Hawke “suggested that much had changed… and that the minister was now more than prepared to proceed on the basis that Australia would breach its non-refoulement obligations and return the appellant to Iraq, even though it had been accepted he was likely to be harmed”.

“This is a shocking and unprecedented development, indicating complete disregard by the Australian government for international law and standards, and its moral obligation not to expel people to harm,” Liberty Victoria wrote in a statement.

Non-refoulement obligations apply in respect of people whom the Australian government have assessed face a real risk of being “killed, tortured, prosecuted or subjected to the death penalty or other serious human rights abuses”. The obligations apply in international law to prevent forced expulsion of people and Australia is a signatory to the said laws that prohibit such acts. 

“Liberty Victoria condemns this radical shift in policy. Not only is it morally and legally unjustifiable, but it may also cause irreparable harm to Australia’s international standing and reputation as a country that upholds and promotes human rights,” the advocacy body commented.

“A government saying it’s okay to send someone to a country where they know the person faces a real risk of being killed or tortured is morally reprehensible and deeply concerning. When Australia signed up to the Refugee Convention, we promised never to do this.”

VIEW ALL