Skip to main content

Search

HREOC Website: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention


Transcript of Hearing - SYDNEY

TUESDAY 16 JULY 2002

Please

note: This is an edited transcript


DR SEV OZDOWSKI,

Human Rights Commissioner

MRS ROBIN SULLIVAN,

Queensland Children's Commissioner

PROFESSOR TRANG

THOMAS, Professor of Psychology

Melbourne Institute of Technology

MS VANESSA LESNIE,

Secretary to the Inquiry

AVILLION HOTEL

BALLROOM 3


DR OZDOWSKI:

It is 9.30 so we will start another day off, formal hearings. My name

is Dr Sev Ozdowski and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner. To my right

is Dr Trang Thomas, Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute

of Technology and to my left Mrs Robin Sullivan, Queensland's Children's

Commissioner. Both of them do assist me with the Inquiry as Assistant

Commissioners. Also, on my left Ms Vanessa Lesnie who is Secretary to

the Inquiry.

Before I start listening

to the witnesses I would like to stress that it's important to respect

the privacy of individuals and in particular children and therefore I'm

asking the witnesses and the media not to identify asylum seekers, not

to disclose their names, and also not to identify any other persons and

also when taking shots of the background if there are people who wouldn't

like to be in the shots please respect their wishes.

Now, I would like

to invite Dr Bernice Pfitzner as the first witness to come forward. Yes

please take a seat over there. Thank you very much for your submission

provided to the Inquiry and for the sworn evidence provided to the Inquiry.

The role of this hearing is to test the evidence you provide us with and

to elicit further information which would be helpful for the Inquiry.

If you would like to submit any additional evidence in any time in the

future please contact us in writing. If you would like to provide any

names which can't be mentioned publicly please talk to the Inquiry Secretary.

Now I would like to ask you to take an oath or affirmation.

BERNICE

PFITZNER, sworn [9.32am]

MEDICAL PRACTITIONER AT WOOMERA DETENTION CENTRE OCTOBER 2000 TO JUNE

2001

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could I ask you to give your full name, address, qualification and the

capacity in which you are appearing for the evidence, for the record?

DR PFITZNER:

My name is Dr Bernice Pfitzner, I live [address removed]. My capacity

was as a medical practitioner at the Woomera Detention Centre during the

time of October 2000 to the end of June 2001.

DR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you very much. Would you like to make an opening statement?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, Dr Ozdowski. I am very pleased to attend because I have long been

worried about the high stress levels of the parents and of the children

at the Woomera Detention Centre and I am very happy to give evidence so

that we can make a positive change to what is happening and has happened

at the Woomera Detention Centre.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much. As you possibly know we spoke to a number of doctors

before including some of the doctors who were in Woomera and we would

like to concentrate on some particular issues. First I would like to ask

you to address the issue of care provided for pregnant and nursing women

and also for babies and toddlers. Could I ask you a question, were there

special arrangements made for people in these groups, for example, were

the appropriate pre-natal and post-natal care, can you perhaps explain

to us how women, pregnant women and young children were looked after in

the complex of the detention centre?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, Dr Ozdowski. In my time there with regard to pregnant and nursing

women, they were given the similar care as were the women in South Australia,

namely that they had ante-natal checks which started as soon as we knew

that they were pregnant and on an ongoing sequential basis. The medical

doctor was to first check the pregnant women and then a specific nurse

was then to follow up on a weekly, fortnightly and monthly basis. After

that as the other women of South Australia were sent at 36 weeks to the

Port Augusta Hospital, the Woomera Hospital did not have the facilities

for delivering babies, so to my mind all the relevant investigations checks

and care were given to the pregnant women.

The only problem

with the situation was that there was such a turnover of nursing staff

it was as you were aware a six week turnover and not always during that

time did we get what I call an obstetric nurse to follow up and it was

disjointed because it wasn't the same nurse that was caring for the women

over the nine months of her pregnancy. So that was a bit of difficulty

but I was able to provide the continuity of this but it wasn't an optimum

situation and that brings me to the concern of the high turnover of medical

staff, in particular the nursing staff there at the detention centre.

DR OZDOWSKI:

From what you said it appears that women were spending a relatively longer

period of time in Port Augusta Hospital, usually as I understand a woman

would go a day or two days before birth and in the case of Woomera they

went substantial periods of time in advance to the hospital. Were they

told, were they explained the reasons for it?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes. I don't think they were sent for any greater length of time compared

to the other women in the South Australian community. It is the set procedure

in the country because there were not obstetricians available easily,

that they went to a specific hospital, in this case it was Port Augusta

Hospital, to be looked after and that was at 36 weeks until their delivery

which is, you know they stayed about four weeks, and this was normal procedure.

My understanding is that they were involved in being informed as to why

they were there for four weeks. The only difficulty was that the husband

may not have been able to go with mother because the husband had to stay

back and look after the other children that were left at the detention

centre and although we did advocate that the husband and the rest of the

family might go and stay at Port Augusta this was not able to be done

because of financial or logistic reasons.

DR OZDOWSKI:

And who informed them about going there, was it your responsibility or

was it somebody else who was informing them?

DR PFITZNER:

It was the nursing staff, well the medical officer decides that she was

36 weeks and it was time that the person went to in this case Port Augusta

Hospital and the obstetrician was informed and he was ready to have the

pregnant woman and she was happy to go. The only worry and sadness was

that she could not, that the rest of the family could not go with her

and visit her and see her over this period of four weeks.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Was she been able to be in regular telephone contact with the family in

detention centre?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, telephone contact was available.

DR OZDOWSKI:

How did you know about that?

DR PFITZNER:

I knew about it because I asked the staff with regard and I saw the husband

and the children on a regular basis so I'm quite certain that there was

contact.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now coming to the mother returning with her child, what supplies were

available, were the nappies, soap, cotton wool and so on available for

nursing mothers?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, there were formulas and nappies and all the various things that are

needed for the newborn. However, these provisions had to be ordered very,

very quickly and it was not always as smooth process of all those things

that were needed being available. For example, like I had to ring down

Adelaide at the pharmacy to order one dozen bottles for the milk and one

dozen teats.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So it was your responsibility to order formula milk for children or it

was sa failure of the system that you had to take that role?

DR PFITZNER:

I understand that the milk was available there, the only thing that I

was asked to order that they couldn't get were the bottles, the feeding

bottles.

DR OZDOWSKI:

The feeding bottles. Was the formula made available to them?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, the formula was available because there were other babies and children

that were there already and that's why they were there. There was never

any difficulty in getting the formula, the only I suppose criticism that

I would have was that there was no set procedure to make the order and

it was done in a very ad hoc manner.

DR OZDOWSKI:

We had evidence to the contrary in Adelaide that there were long delays

in accessing formula milk because it was relatively expensive. We had

evidence that some mothers had to feed children for a number of days with

hot water and sugar. What would be your commentary about this kind of

stories being told to us?

DR PFITZNER: Yes,

that may have been in the early days before I was there. I was there 2000,

maybe it was '99, but when I was there, there was never any inadequate

supply of formula. I saw the actual formulas there and the other problem

is a lot of staff were from Western Australia and Brisbane and Sydney

I think and so they used to order all those formulas and necessary equipment

from those places, whereas I was from South Australia, being a medical

practitioner I was able to ring directly to the pharmacy and the pharmacy

would bring it up within 24 hours, so while I was there, to my knowledge

there was not any inadequate feeding formula at all.

DR OZDOWSKI:

You mentioned earlier in your opening statement the issue of stress. Could

you perhaps describe a bit more, what did you mean by it, how children

could have been stressed in detention?

DR PFITZNER:

For my part I noticed the stress being with the parents greatly. I mean

the fathers and mothers that came. They were stressed because they were,

in effect, in limbo. When I arrived they were there, say 18 months and

some of them are still there and it is now three years and the reason

leading to the stress and anxiety and depression was because they did

not know the stage of the application of their protection visa, so they

almost came daily with this high stress and depression not knowing from

the Department of Immigration the status of their application and this,

of course, is high stress percolated down to the children, for example,

the mothers and fathers were very short tempered, they could not give

the adequate loving and cuddling and playing that a mother and father

would give in a more relaxed situation. They wouldn't be able to play

and verbalise because the parents themselves were very very highly stressed

and to my mind it was because they did not know whether they would stay

or leave.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could family function normally in such circumstances?

DR PFITZNER:

No, they couldn't, it's just like a huge bereavement or a huge death or

a huge catastrophe. Father and mother are not in raring mood, if you want

to put it that way, to bring up the children. When you rare children,

I am specialised in child development so I am very aware of children's

development and therefore there was no stimulation for the children in

speech or activity or play and it would be the same for any of us in the

community when we ourselves are highly stressed after huge calamity, and

this is a huge calamity, you just have to depend on your own resources

and the children are swept aside. Mother and father are impatient with

them and there is not any more loving or caring or warmth left to give

to the children because they themselves needed a lot of care.

DR OZDOWSKI:

You were in Woomera at the time of relative calm and relative in a way,

time when new people were still coming there. Did you observe any differences

in families and children and parents from the moment of arrival till,

say, a few months later and if so what were the changes?

DR PFITZNER:

I wouldn't put it as relatively calm, there is never relatively calm at

Woomera Detention Centre Dr Ozdowski. When I was there it was an in between

period, there were people who had been there for two years and there were

new ones still coming so I did have the opportunity to observe the different

groups and the stress level that they went through. So the people who

were there 18 months or so, they were highly stressed and therefore they

were self harming, like hanging and slashing and taking overdoses which

we had to monitor and help and send to hospital.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did it involve children as well and young people under 18?

DR PFITZNER:

No. That is why I am quite surprised that depression and stress must be

very, very deep now that the children are being involved as I hear from

the media reports. When I was there we worked very hard with the children

to give them play facilities and developmental activities and we worked

very hard with the parents to try to bolster their moods but it was very,

very hard because again, I stress, they did not know the status of their

visa application and therefore although facilities were available to the

children, play facilities, school facilities, the parents would not want

to take them.

They lack any energy,

they just stayed up very late at night as I understand, 3 or 4 o'clock

with the children and then they would sleep after that from exhaustion,

I understand and they would sleep till about 10 o'clock and we would have

activities starting at 9 and there was a dearth of children attending

these activities because of the high stress level and the non-compliance

of parents who themselves were stressed and were not in any mood to send

their children to school or to any play activity.

So, you asked me

about the progress of the stress level, yes, I saw it back to front, I

saw these one who were highly stressed, then I saw more people coming

in. The people when they come in were full of anticipation that Australia

being a very humanitarian, caring and I'm from Singapore myself, we always

have admired Australia for being such a caring nation around the South-East

Asian area.

We always said we

wish we could have that same attitude that Australia has but unfortunately

now, this has deteriorated and has gone down with regard to our status

of a caring nation.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So, you observed some change happening in people between arrival and

DR PFITZNER:

That's right, yes, I'm going off the point, aren't I? Yes, I saw when

they came in with the reputation of Australia having such a good human

rights track record, they were quite sure that they would be processed

quickly, that their application visa would be settled within six to 12

months at the most. When after three months I could see depression set

in and after six months I could see severe depression, anxiety, self-harm

and even some detainees having psychotic episodes and in lay terms, it

is going mad.

That was very stressful

to observe. We had to send a couple to Glenside to be looked after and

although I did not follow up with Glenside.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Glenside being?

DR PFITZNER:

Glenside being our mental hospital there in South Australia. They had

to be detained and assessed by a psychiatrist there and so with that kind

of mood happening to their parents I can imagine what the feeling of the

children can be. Certainly it would be very detrimental to their state.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What about ACM and DIMIA staff, how were those levels of stress impacting

on them?

DR PFITZNER:

ACM staff when I was there I saw four or five what they call, "CERT"

calls. This is emergency calls when there was a sudden uprising of a group

of detainees where they would maybe set something on fire, maybe start

slashing themselves, maybe start hanging themselves, maybe start throwing

stones at the guards, maybe start breaking windows those are the sort

of things we call a CERT for. When these were called we would be on high

alert and numerous detainees and ACM staff came in with cuts and bruises

and broken bones and slashes etcetera. It is very painful for even me

to recall and therefore it was very painful for ACM who had to go into

the compound and bring these injured people out for our medical attention.

I was aware that

two or three, one was an interpreter just went to pieces, a couple of

nurses just became hysterical, a couple of ACM guards had a fractured

ankle, not hysterical but very angry with the detainees all these people

I understand did have access to counselling but to my mind it would have

left an almost indelible impression.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So basically what you are saying is that mental health of everyone in

Woomera was in danger including DIMIA officers and ACM staff not just

talking about the detainees. So everyone was really having the impact

of the situation.

DR PFITZNER:

It was very stressful, yes and for ourselves being medically trained in

managing stress and I gather the nurses would be so we would know how

to manage and well I have seen such stress before but never in that kind

of situation but I would imagine that DIMIA officers well a lot of them

I had to be involved in counselling as well. The DIMIA officers maybe

were not prepared, maybe some were prepared more than others. I was not

involved in training them how to handle stress.

With regard to DIMIA

staff they were not very much hands on except for the director who came

in to help calm the situation but yes on the whole the situation would

be highly stressful and one would not leave without some stressful mark

being left on us all.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did you use any many medicines to manage the stress levels there?

DR PFITZNER:

Of which people?

DR OZDOWSKI:

Well anybody, but especially the detainees.

DR PFITZNER: Yes,

the detainees - as a medical officer I was contracted to look after the

detainees, as a side effect I would look after the actual staff, DIMIA

staff, ACM staff if it was an emergency then it would go to the Woomera

doctor who would carry on the follow up but my specific task was to look

after the detainees and I would say without over exaggerating that all

of the people there were highly stressed. They had come a long way from

the Middle East. They had travelled from the Middle East to, from Europe,

Middle East to Malaysia to Indonesia where they caught the boat. They

had to wait for a week or two before they caught the boat to this land

of milk and honey called Australia and

DR OZDOWSKI: But

were you prescribing any medicines to manage this stress?

DR PFITZNER: Yes,

I am just first identifying where the stress came from. So when they came

they were highly stressed from the travel of coming. Then their stress

dropped because they had hope in the first three or six months. After

that time all these stress levels became so high and it was evidenced

by all this physical self harm and yes, as we all know some human beings

handle stress very well and did not need medication but there were a lot

that did and when I say a lot I would say about 50 per cent needed some

kind of anti-depressive, anti-anxiety, even anti-psychotic that is the

kind of stress level, to alleviate their signs and symptoms. So, yes.

MS LESNIE:

Did that include children, people under 18?

DR PFITZNER: No,

no. For myself I try very hard not to include medication for children

but placed - and required the two or three psychologists that we had to

counsel them and try to de-stress them in what we call a verbal psycho-semantic

way rather than medication wise.

DR OZDOWSKI: You

mentioned various incidents like riots or burnings or hanging, two questions.

My first question is were children exposed to such riots and the second

question are you aware of the use of chemical restraints to manage behaviour

of individuals?

DR PFITZNER: Yes,

certainly the children have been affected by what they saw, the self harm

of their parents or their friends by the stoning or the rioting or the

complete undisciplined and non-controlled activities. The children would

have observed all this and of course children would be highly stressed

and there were psychologists that would be able to manage the children

and there was a colleague of mine who was specifically asked to come up

to handle the children but there was so much work to do and I do not believe

that they had adequate therapy there because the stress level was so high

and it even crossed over to the people who were supposed to provide the

healing activities.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Would it have a long term impact on children because we are really seeing

quite a substantial proportion of them to start in community?

DR PFITZNER:

I would have thought so being a child developmentalist of course never

experiencing these kinds of factors and pressures I would have thought

it would effect all children. But children are resilient and resistant

and I would hope that with therapy they would improve. I am now on the

Board of STARTTS which is Survivors of Torture and Trauma and I am there

requiring that we have, the children in there have a baseline of what

their stress level is and after three or six months assess the situation.

So for the moment I have noticed their stress level but I can't see what

the follow up is. I would think looking at our own children they all behave

differently. Children on the whole are very tough people, with the right

help and treatment they should come through right but there are some children

who just can't manage it and I don't know what percentage this would be

of the children that will finally become our Australian citizens.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Coming to the second question about use of chemical restraint. Are you

aware of use of chemical restraints regarding particular persons participating

in riots, or misbehaving?

DR PFITZNER:

No. If they were participating in riots the ACM officers would come and

quell them as they do in prisons and so on, calming things down. I myself,

and I during the nine months that I was there had to prescribe to two

or three people who were very, very highly stressed, wanting to self-harm,

and so I had to prescribe some calming medication in order that they also

be taken down to our Adelaide Psychiatric Hospital or Glenside. That was

the only time that I would have noticed what you call restraint, but the

restraint on a universal basis, no.

DR OZDOWSKI: Just

the last topic I would like to ask you about before I will ask my Assistant

Commissioner to ask you questions. Did you have children with physical

disabilities, or mental disabilities in Woomera?

DR PFITZNER: Yes,

we did, and I assessed quite a few of them. Yes, I'm aware of it. There

were some who, two or three who were completely deaf, weren't speaking.

One was 5 years old. Another was 2 years old. Another was 7. And they

were all referred appropriately to the Adelaide Children's Hospital, now

called the Women's and Children's Hospital, in Adelaide, and given the

appropriate treatment. There were a couple of children with very severe

birth defects, and sometimes we marvel at how they came across, or severe

birth defects, and they had what our children would have had. Sometimes

they had it even more rapidly because we pressured them very hard, because

the Woomera Detention Centre was not a place to have these children, with

severe birth defects.

DR OZDOWSKI: And

what period of time they were spending in Woomera?

DR PFITZNER:

Before they went to the hospital?

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes, well, I assume if they went to hospital they went for a treatment

and they came back to Woomera, or could you describe what was happening.

DR PFITZNER:

Well, the one that I recall with severe - some severe epilepsy and severe

mental disorder and severe physical disorder, was sent down, assessed,

and returned, and the child was finally sent down to Villawood, I think,

because Villawood is very close. It's here, yes, in Sydney, isn't it?

Villawood is very close to a big children's hospital. We felt that the

child had to be kept at the children hospital's in Adelaide somewhere,

or - but not in the Woomera Detention Centre.

DR OZDOWSKI:

And then, what, sent to Villawood Detention Centre?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, went to Villawood.

DR OZDOWSKI: What

were the times of children with disabilities in Woomera? How long were

they spending there?

DR PFITZNER:

What was the time-frame before they went down?

DR OZDOWSKI: No,

just, the longest time and the shortest time you would remember about

children with disabilities being in Woomera.

DR PFITZNER:

Well, when - I had a bit of a problem with regard to nurses referring

and so on to us as medical. I suppose in a way some of the nurses were

trying to protect us, and were not referring them to us, those who had

what I thought were severe medical conditions. So that is one difficulty

with regard to the nurses keeping from further - so this particular child

DR OZDOWSKI:

So nurses constitute a barrier of access to medical practitioners?

DR PFITZNER:

In one way if you want to be negative, we could put it as a barrier; on

the other way we could put it that we were almost over-worked and the

nurses were trying to filter the severe cases to us. So I would like to

put it in a positive manner, that this was done, but of course there were

errors made and sometimes delay. And this particular child that I'm thinking

of, there was some delay. I would have liked to see that particular child

when the child had arrived with obvious physical defect, mental and physical

defect. But I think I didn't see the child until the child had become,

fitting or severe breathing problems for about four to six weeks, and

I happened to see the child and the nurses treating it, and called the

child up and then identified the severe defect.

So in ideal circumstances

yes, that child should have been seen earlier than four to six weeks.

Once we observed the child, then it's not the problem. It just went very,

very quickly because we then pressured ACM or DIMIA to get the appropriate

guards, to get the appropriate appointment, to go down to, I don't remember

whether it's straight to the Children's or whether it was via Port Augusta,

and so

DR OZDOWSKI:

Are you saying when you are talking about "very quickly", are

you saying that the Department of Immigration was giving special priority

to children with disabilities in terms of processing of their cases?

DR PFITZNER:

I think it was up to the nurses and the medical officer if there was a

severe problem. I would myself go down and say, you know, "This person

needs to go". I'd speak to the DIMIA officer to get the release to

go to the hospital, because that was a financial commitment there. And

then go to ACM and say, "Let's get a car and guards and whatever

is needed to go down," and ring the hospital and make the appointments.

So all our medical role did not only refer to medical diagnosis. If we

wanted the thing to progress it was up to the doctor and the nurse, and

I took that task on, to actually go and push the thing through.

So it may be some

of the other doctors may have felt their task was just medical, and just

referred and hoped that it percolated through. In my experience if that

was done, and I don't know, the progress would be very slow. And I would

myself go and see the DIMIA staff, the DIMIA director, go and see the

ACM staff, the ACM manager, to get all those things together. It was a

very huge logistic operation, because you had to get permission, then

you have to ring the hospital to make sure that the child would be received,

and then the whole thing would progress.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Who was responsible for financing of such an operation?

DR PFITZNER:

I'm not sure because I don't know the DIMIA and ACM contract was, but

I am aware, just listening to perhaps some of the arguments, that there

was a gray area about who should finance what in the medical field. And,

you know, some of the things, they took a long time. But in the end, I

don't know about the financing but I just said, "The child has to

go, and you have to work it between yourselves." So there was a bit

of argument, and I did not stop to hear how they resolved it.

The biggest argument

with regard to medical access was in regard to preventative work, e.g.

immunisation, child development checks. Those were the things that I felt

that the children needed, that they didn't get, and I, being from child

developmental area, rang Child and Youth Health who I used to work for,

to ask nurses to come up. And there was a huge hiatus there because who

was to pay was the big issue because, as you're aware, the children are

not sick, but still they need the stimulation to grow up in a healthy

manner.

And in the end, as

I think I put in my submission, I had to just immunise the 200 of them

because it was such an argument as to whose responsibility of payment

it was, to do this kind of preventative work. So that's the area I would

be very critical about, an area with immediate treatment. It would be

done but it was up to the medical staff also to push it along.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Dr Pfitzner, thank you very much. I will ask now my Assistant Commissioners

to ask questions. Let's start with Mrs Sullivan.

MRS SULLIVAN:

You've mentioned treating stress. What would be the other three or four

top illnesses you would have treated in the centre.

DR PFITZNER:

Well, I suppose I would categorise it in two areas. One is with regard

to the mental health which areas would be high stress, anxiety, depression,

psychosis, we would have to handle that. The other area was physical.

Physical - in those areas we would have high blood pressure that we have

never seen in our life - 220, 250 over 150. I don't know whether you're

medical but that is huge. Our normal is 120/80, okay.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Right.

DR PFITZNER:

I've never seen over 200. You know, about to explode. So they carried

that. Whether that was a result of stress or whether it was a result of

organic origin I don't know but we had to treat them and we had to investigate.

There was severe diabetes, sugar-levels high, high - never seen before.

There were heart diseases, murmurs. Many things we have never seen because

we are such a developed country and these things are picked up when a

child is born or blood-pressure is monitored. There were the chronic illnesses,

asthma - severe asthma. Chronic illnesses.

Then there were the

infectious diseases. The hepatitis Bs and Cs. The infections of the skins,

scabies. You could see tracks of scabies under the skin, we had never

seen before. Huge tropical sores, we have never seen before. It was a

learning experience for all of us. I had to ring tropical medicines to

find out the treatment and so on. And those were the tropical diseases.

Intestinal parasites, we call them liver flukes and so on. Causing severe

abdominal pain and so on. So that was another area of infectious diseases.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And all of these were observable in the children and young people as well

as adults?

DR PFITZNER:

Scabies - the whole boatload had scabies.

MRS SULLIVAN:

I think you've possibly answered this question but in terms of the prevalence

of those diseases in the broader community, can you give an idea of whether

it was double, triple? I'm just trying to get a sense of your workload.

DR PFITZNER:

Compared to the Australian community?

MRS SULLIVAN:

Yes, mainstream Australian communities.

DR PFITZNER:

Oh, we cannot compare. Our Australian community is very, very healthy.

Australian community would not have any of these infectious diseases,

except if you were a traveller going to Kathmandu or something like that

you would come back with these kinds of diseases.

MRS SULLIVAN:

In terms of hepatitis were you vaccinating in that area as well as others?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, the workload was heavy. Very, very heavy. On 24 hours a day. We would

get three or four calls through the night with regard to self-harm in

the night.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So, would the normal GP be able to deal with these illnesses you've

just described or does it require some specialist knowledge?

DR PFITZNER:

The normal GP, which I am also, would initially find it very stressful

and very demanding. But it is not beyond the ability of that normal GP

to get up to speed to learn about it. We've never seen some of these diseases,

but if we are going to have migration of people from these areas we ought

to put ourselves up to speed to work on it.

I don't think any

specialist would be any better than a normal GP. Sometimes we would ring

the specialist and they would say, well we've never heard of this intestinal

infection, I'll look up my notes and come back to you. So in terms of

who should be employed I think the GP is the most appropriate but the

GP has to be the type that doesn't get stressed, and the type that is

willing to read up on tropical medicines and to learn very, very quickly

and hit the ground running.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Thank you. The next question is also a comparison question in a sense.

I'm trying to get a feel for the professional autonomy you would have

as a GP in a public hospital for example and the professional autonomy

you would have working in the detention centre. Could you make some comment

about that comparison?

DR PFITZNER: Yes,

with regard to working in the hospital you would be less stressed because

you have powers of your colleagues, peers and seniors to relate to, to

discuss, to give you a sense that you are doing things the right way.

When I was there I was the only medical officer except for a part-time.

We used to discuss but we had difficulty referring to our specialists.

Skin specialists, mental specialists and other infectious diseases specialists.

So, in that way we were more pressured with regard to letting us know

whether we were doing the right thing. We checked constantly but the people

were not on tap. With regard to autonomy, I'm not quite sure what you

are asking me.

MRS SULLIVAN:

My understanding of the management structure of health services is

that it is quite often a nurse who is the manager of the health services.

DR PFITZNER:

I see. Yes, we had a lot of trouble, we as medical officers had a lot

of trouble with regard to the structure that was there. This is not a

criticism, it's something that I hope will improve so I will speak in

that vein. The co-ordinator was invariably a nurse. The nurse was there

- I myself felt that the co-ordinator should be a medical officer because

things were very, very complex there. High on the list were diseases that

you never come across, that you couldn't explain adequately because you

were hitting the ground running all the time.

So, if it was a nurse

it needed to be a very special nurse who had qualifications in obstetrics,

in infectious disease, in mental disease, in chronic health. Apart from

also knowing the financial set-up and the referral criteria. So, whoever

the co-ordinator, it was a very difficult job. And if the co-ordinator

was compliant and worked well with the medical officer that was not a

problem. If the nurse did not have a problem with regard to hierarchy

structure that was not a problem. If we could have worked as a team with

nurses - co-ordinator nurses and medical officers that was not a problem.

But I am aware, and

know, that the turnover is every six weeks. And that was dreadful. We

would have a team - the co-ordinator would be permanent - but then the

teamwork of all the hard work would be gone. All the keeping of simple

things like medication, intravenous, things we need in a hurry, the new

nurses wouldn't know where it was. So, you were there stemming the bleeding

and you ask, get intravenous therapy, they wouldn't know where it was.

So, I had to ask someone to hold the bleeding. You knew where it was because

you were long-term there, you'd have to get it and so on.

It was not the best

situation for the stressful, almost war zone, to have. In that kind of

environment you need a 12-month contract and a teamwork, and a team to

know exactly what you mean when you say, get the connector to the intravenous,

and they know where to go.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Perhaps I could put an example to you? For example, if your were to refer

somebody for treatment to a psychiatric hospital, which could be quite

expensive, would you have the situation where the nurse - or somebody

else in the hierarchy - would second-guess your diagnosis, or would act

slowly on your diagnosis?

DR PFITZNER:

Well, it may have happened to the other doctors but being the person that

I am, I was insistent that I thought was right, because in the end I know

that I would carry the can if something happened. So yes, it happened,

we argued about whether it was necessary, money-wise, finance-wise, medical-wise.

But in the end I would say, if you want it that way you sign the form

to say that this person is not right, and you take it, and many times

they - always in their review they would back, back down. But the thing

is, why did I need to do it is the question which you would appreciate.

MRS SULLIVAN:

My final question goes back to your comments about the resilience

of children. I am assuming that you were concerned about developmental

delay from some of your opening comments. Were there developmental delays

occurring in children as a result of living in the detention centre that

in fact are irreversible?

DR PFITZNER:

As the result of staying in the detention centre?

MRS SULLIVAN:

Yes, of the environmental factors that are there, or the social factors,

or even the physical factors?

DR PFITZNER:

I can say that there were children who came in with severe developmental

problems, but that had occurred at birth or coming through, but with regard

to children who were there and the environment impacting on that child,

no, in the time that I was there. After seeing that, you know, I just

eyeballed them, I didn't assess them, and to actually answer your question

positively and certainly we would need to do a long-term follow-up.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Is that some of the work you're doing on your new board, you are following

through with some of those children?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, it's started, survivors of torture and trauma, yes.

MRS SULLIVAN:

But your judgement is that sufficient time has not elapsed yet to

make that judgment?

DR PFITZNER:

No, well they are being assessed now. I would like them to be assessed

as soon as they are discharged, and having a three month ongoing - whether

this is done, I don't know, because of financial constraints and so on,

but ideally that would be good and we could learn how we might manage

the children better if there were some permanent damage rather than temporary

damage. In my mind at this present time I believe it is temporary, but

I could be very wrong.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So no trends have emerged to this point in time in your data?

DR PFITZNER:

No.

PROF THOMAS:

Probably one way to eliminate the effect of pre-migration factors would

be to observe the children who are born there, so during your time how

do you observe those who are born there in the first 12 months of life?

DR PFITZNER:

Yes, I was there nine months, and the children that were born there would

probably be in the middle of my nine months, so I would have said I did

not have enough time to observe, but indeed the children were feeding

well, which is one of the signs, the children were ..... development was

okay, they were holding their heads up and following. In terms of visual

development they were tracking and following. So just informally I was

not aware, and I saw the children when they came out and picked their

food and drank their milk and so on, I was not aware that there was any

developmental delay of the children that were born there, but look, I

was only there nine months. They were born in the middle so I only had

a six months' look at them.

PROF THOMAS:

It's a pity, because now there are some children there who are sort of

one year old, and it would be good if we could have some objective assessment.

DR PFITZNER:

Well, in my time I did ask for a team of child developmentalists in the

beginning of my nine months, who as you say have a base line knowledge

of their development and later when they went out to have a follow-up

of these. But because of financial constraints, because of the constraints

of whether it was State of Federal payment, this did not happen in my

time and I was very, very upset with that, to tell you the truth, because

I am very, very aware of child development and wanted to show how we might

best handle the children better if we had data from the very start. I

am sorry I was not able to get a team up there.

PROF THOMAS:

How about the older children? Do you see any age inappropriate behaviour?

DR PFITZNER: With

regard to the older children, when I was there, I suppose they were not

that long there. They were there maybe nine months, and they related well,

played well and so on, spoke well, but towards the end of my nine months

there were beginning to be some children who were getting very - who would

not eat, who would sit alone on their own, because their parents were

very, very highly stressed. Those are the children I did worry about,

I don't know how they progressed, don't know.

PROF THOMAS: I

am interested in the relationship between the guards or the ACM officers

and the children. We tend to hear of the extreme cases, but to your observation

how do you find them in general?

DR PFITZNER:

In general, as we went along the guards were better and better trained.

Initially as I understand it the guards were very criminal based, very

hard edged, and I think - I had a great problem with that. They were detainees,

you know, they were asylum seekers. So I was involved in training some

of the newer guards to say this is not the way, they're not criminals,

this is not the way to treat - if you are not treating them on a humanitarian

ground then think that if you treat them such-and-such a way that you

will get a better response. As we went along during my nine months time

there, there was a great improvement in the handling of the asylum seekers

of detainees. On the whole you are asking me were they treated well, with

respect? I think it depended on the individual, but on the whole it was

not optimum. Some treated them wonderfully, understood that they were

human beings just like the rest of the community, and just treated them

as friends and so on. On the other end of the wedge, they were ordered

around, told to not give opinions, pushed back and those sorts of things

make you lose your dignity and self-esteem. But there was a middle ground

of people who were, you know, it was not optimum. Nobody had come across

such a situation before, and certainly none of the ACM officers knew how

to handle them at first. When I left, they were improving but again, they

had to move after six weeks, and new people coming in, and had the whole

situation again. It was hard, very hard.

PROF THOMAS:

So it's back to accountability, how the complaint process, do the detainees

complain if there is something that they think should not be done?

DR PFITZNER: I

understand that there was, that they report it to an officer, the officer

takes it through, and there was a specific officer dedicated for the complaints,

but my hands were full with regard to looking after the mental and physical,

so I did not. Sure, that area needed to follow-up but I cannot comment

on that area with any great reliability.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Dr Pfitzner, thank you very much for your evidence. Would you like to

make a final comment, a final statement?

DR PFITZNER: Yes

I would, Dr Ozdowski. I hope that this human rights Inquiry would not

be a witch hunt for anything that has happened, or has passed, because

there were a lot of people like ourselves who were concerned about what

was happening. We had never come across such a situation as this before

in our life. I imagine it would be like, you know, a war zone in Vietnam

or wherever, I don't know, but we were all trying to work our best, and

there were people who were not equipped with the ability to handle it,

and there was this huge turnover every six weeks which made the situation

worse. So I feel, and it's in my submission, that coming out from this

Inquiry, that we should certainly identify the negatives, but put in place

the positives, how we might do it better everywhere in the world. We're

not doing it well and I think if Australia can come back to our human

rights and our place in South East Asia, which has a high standing on

human rights, and give a positive response how we might change the situation,

it would be very beneficial.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you, Dr Pfitzner.

Now, could I ask

representatives of the Muslim Women Network of Australia to approach.

Thank you for coming. Could I ask you to start with taking an oath or

an affirmation?

MS JAMILA HUSSAIN,

affirmed [10.32am]

MRS FAIKAH BEHARDIEN, affirmed

AUSTRALIAN MUSLIM WOMEN'S ASSOCIATION

Now I would like

to ask you to state your names, addresses and the capacity in which you

are appearing for the purpose of the record.

MS HUSSAIN: My

name is Jamila Hussain, that's J-a-m-i-l-a H-u-s-s-a-i-n. I live at [address

removed] and I am the - I am appearing as a member of the Muslim Women's

National Network of Australia. I am the person who wrote the submission

that is before you and I would intend, if it pleases you, to make an opening

statement and simply mention a couple of things and leave it to my friend,

Faikah, to do the bulk of the evidence.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could we ask the second person to do the introduction for the record and

then we will go to the opening statement.

MRS BEHARDIEN:

My name is Faikah Behardien, I live at [address removed] and I am

here as a volunteer of the Muslim Women's National Network. I am also

the Vice-President of the organisation.

DR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you very much. Ms Hussain, please go with your opening statement.

MS HUSSAIN:

I just wanted to say a few words about the organisation that I represent.

The Muslim Women's National Network of Australia is a multi-cultural Muslim

women's organisation. It has the aim of helping Muslim women in the community

to integrate into the mainstream community. It also offers them help in

physical and educational matters, for example we have run Arabic classes,

we have run English classes for non-English speaking women. We have been

very involved in interfaith work and in giving talks and seminars and

information to churches and community organisations about the Muslim community

and we also liaise with interstate Muslim women's groups. We are not a

very large organisation and all our work is voluntary.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could you mention your experience with people who are either in detention

or who came out of detention and in particular, children?

MS HUSSAIN:

Yes. I have not been a frequent visitor to Villawood. Some of our ladies

started visiting Villawood Immigration Detention Centre in Ramadan last

year, that was December, and gradually we became aware that they were

very unhappy with the conditions of some of the children there. Some of

the ladies began to visit offering material aid such as clothes. At Eid-ul-Fitr

we took food and tried to arrange a celebration for them and we also became

very concerned about the education or rather the lack of education that

was being offered to the children, in particular the children over the

age of 12, ones between 12 and 18.

I took it upon myself

to make inquiries to try to establish the position in other detention

centres and I liaised with people interstate and also spoke to detainees

about the educational situation. I think at that stage at the time the

submission was written, the situation was that the younger children at

Villawood were getting some education but there was some disagreement

about how much. Some of them said a few hours a week, four or five hours

a week. Some said only about two hours a week.

The older children

were getting nothing. I was personally very concerned about this because

some of those children had been there for over two years and that is a

huge gap in their life for them to make up when and if they are ever released.

I was also involved with Sister Faikah in arranging a meeting with the

minister's advisory committee at Villawood, particularly a Dr Al Salami

and Major General Glenny and there were three things that we made representations

about there.

One was the education

of the children and we asked in particular that the children be allowed

to leave Villawood to attend local schools as we'd been informed was happening

at Curtin and possibly one or two other detention centres. We also made

a representation about religious matters and the situation there was that

at that time there was no provision at all for Muslim religious instruction

or for Islamic religious services.

At some time in the

past before we became involved, the detainees had had the use of a building

as a mosque. As I am sure you would be aware some of them managed to tunnel

under that building and escaped from the detention centre. As a result,

that building was taken away and there were no provisions at all in place

for any religious instruction or counselling. We asked that a Shia Imam

be allowed to visit the centre on a regular basis on Fridays to lead the

jum'a prayers.

I do not know what

happened as a result of our representations but at the moment, I understand

the Supreme Islamic Council which is one of the peak Islamic bodies in

the State has arranged for an Imam to be allowed to go to Villawood on

Fridays to conduct the jum'a prayer. As far as I know there are no arrangements

at all for religious instruction for the children or for anyone else there.

The third issue that

we talked about was women's health needs. Particularly that the women

be allowed to consult female doctors because as you know some or most

of these women come from cultures where women are kept very much secluded

and would be far too embarrassed to consult a male doctor particularly

about any kind of personal matter. I am not sure whether what has happened

in relation to that, perhaps Faikah would be able to say more.

The other thing that

I thought perhaps to make some comment on is the question relating to

Muslims in detention and the misunderstandings in the general community.

I'm in my other life I am a lecturer in law and my particular field of

interest is Islamic Law and South East Asian Law. I found through my discussions

with other people in the community and all sorts of ways that there is

a huge amount of ignorance about Islam amongst the majority of Australians,

even well educated Australians and unfortunately people seem to get their

knowledge of Islam and of Muslims and of Muslim culture from the media

and particularly the horror stories and the sensational stories that get

the most prominence in the media.

So I think there

always has been a generally negative impression of Islam and Muslims in

Australia. Since the Tampa crisis and since 11 September last year I have

noticed that there have been two separate reactions amongst the general

community. One has been a great increase in interest and our president

Sister Aziza and myself have been almost run off our feet sometimes by

going from place to place by invitation and giving talks to church groups,

community groups, in my case members of the judicial commission and all

sorts of other people about the Muslim community in Australia so there

has been a heightened interest and hopefully an increase in understanding

on one side.

On the other side

there seems to have been a rise in prejudice. Now I don't look like a

Muslim so I don't experience a great deal of that myself but from what

other people have told me there have been increased incidents of racism

if you like against other people. I've only noticed this myself in that

I have written a couple of letters to my local newspaper and in return

I have received quite a lot of anonymous racist mail

DR OZDOWSKI: But

could I ask you to focus on children in detention, it is what this Inquiry

MS HUSSAIN:

Okay, my letters to the local press were about children in detention.

I didn't mention Muslims, just children in detention of whatever nationality

but I noticed that some of the anonymous mail I had got back was about

Muslims. Obviously there is a transfer from anyone in detention must be

a Muslim and therefore we hate them. I find that a matter of great concern.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Are you aware of this prejudice happening in the detention centres?

MS HUSSAIN:

I have been, I have heard there is some but I wouldn't like to comment

any further because I haven't seen it or heard it myself.

DR OZDOWSKI: The

lack of religious education in detention centres, how does it impact on

children?

MS HUSSAIN:

Well children would grow up without a proper understanding, without any

understanding perhaps of their religion and religion is part of life,

part of culture and I would think on a long term basis it would have a

rather negative effect. It would also I think divide them from their parents

because their parents would presumably have been people who would have

had religious instruction at least in their youth, would have grown up

and lived in a society which supported their religion and their children

are growing up in a society without religious education and when they

leave, if they leave in a society which doesn't support their religion.

So there is an alienation that takes place there.

DR OZDOWSKI: Does

your organisation or is your organisation in contact with children who

have left detention centres?

MS HUSSAIN:

I think two who are very small and we couldn't really make any comment

about them and some much older boys, possibly young men but I couldn't

say any more than that.

DR OZDOWSKI: I

will ask my Assistant Commissioners whether they have got any questions,

Mrs Hussain.

PROF THOMAS:

Are you aware of any information, anything at all about Muslim girls in

these detention centres?

MS HUSSAIN:

Well I have met Muslim girls there.

MS LESNIE: So

what are some of the difficulties facing the girls that you met there?

MS HUSSAIN: Well

the girl that I had most to do with was most concerned about the lack

of education. She wanted to go on to university. Now that particular girl

has been sent back. I really haven't had any other conversations with

children.

MRS BEHARDIEN:

If I could just add to that, the kinds of concerns that Muslim children

have are exactly the same as any child would have and the fact that they

are not getting an education is in itself of concern to all of us. So

there isn't any specific discrimination if you wish against Muslim children

although if you look at the stats most of the children in detention are

Muslim but the fact that they are not getting a good education that they

are in a context that is totally abnormal for them is in itself a huge

concern for the whole community.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes we have had quite a lot of evidence from teachers and so on, on this

subject. Mrs Sullivan?

MRS SULLIVAN:

We did see some evidence during our visits to the centres of Christian

ministers of religion having access to detainees. Were you saying in your

opening comment that access is not available or just that there haven't

been appropriate people to take that function.

MRS BEHARDIEN:

My understanding is that one of the leading Imam's not only in Sydney

but in Australia was banned if you wish from coming to Villawood detention

centre two years ago and so there isn't any structured religious instruction

being given by anybody at the moment.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Is that only Villawood or do you have a knowledge of the other centres?

MRS BEHARDIEN:

I correspond with a minor, an unaccompanied minor in Port Hedland and

what he tells me is that the people within the detention centre look after

each other. So those with a little bit of religious knowledge would share

it with the kids and with the other adults.

MRS SULLIVAN:

This is because of the lack of an appropriate person to come in.

MS HUSSAIN:

I could say also that I visited a couple of the young men and they asked

for religious material to be brought in - we did that.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And my second question relates to people who have been released into the

community under whatever circumstances. It would seem to be natural for

those people to gravitate to the appropriate cultural groups that they

identify with. What is your judgment about the amount of support they

are to get from such groups.

MRS BEHARDIEN:

Fairly little, fairly ad hoc unfortunately and it is really not structured

and it is really left up to the goodwill of the organisations concerned

and the people concerned to provide it. So unfortunately there is no formalised

structure to enable them to access religious instruction or religious

support or counselling or anything related to it but the community is

fairly good. So not to denigrate the community they are fairly good about

that.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Do they give priority to the unaccompanied minors or is it just a

more general support?

MRS BEHARDIEN:

I'm not quite sure if you'd call it, you know, like favoured support.

That a bunch of - a group of boys from Bamiya, Hazzara boys, are being

looked after both in the community, in families as well as in institutionalised

areas or buildings if you wish and organisations.

MRS SULLIVAN:

We have had some comments made that unaccompanied male minors - particularly

those round about 15 to 18 - have been disaffected about education and

training within the centre, and when they move into the community are

similarly not attracted to education and training opportunities. They

are at a bit of a loose end, they are searching around for some meaning.

Is that your experience?

MRS BEHARDIEN:

I've worked with them - not worked. I meet with a couple of families on

a regular basis. One family has a 21 year old son who decided that he

wanted to improve his English and went back to high school to do his HSC

and he is back at high school. The younger brother and younger sister

are still in high school. So they value education, and that is one family.

The others are younger kids. They're at primary school, and they have

gone back to school. They happily adapt.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So, just to clarify, you don't have any experience of this type of young

male with a

MRS BEHARDIEN:

Not the unaccompanied ones, no. My experience has been with males as part

of a family group, yes.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So is there an identified community group that might focus on young people

specifically?

MRS BEHARDIEN:

You mean within this community?

MRS SULLIVAN:

Well, it may not be your organisation, but are you able to identify a

community group that such young people could make contact with?

MRS BEHARDIEN:

Not really, no.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Thank you.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much, to your organisation and to you for coming and making

a statement, Mrs Behardien.

Now, we will have

a break. We will meet again at 10 past 11.

SHORT BREAK [10.53am]

RESUMES [11.10am]

DR OZDOWSKI: Now,

I would like to invite the Lebanese Muslim Association to come forward

to give evidence.

KEYSAR TRAD, affirmed

[11.11am]

LEBANESE MUSLIMS ASSOCIATION

DR OZDOWSKI: Now,

can I ask you to give your name, address, qualification, and capacity

in which you are appearing, for the record.

MR TRAD: My

name is Keysar Trad. I am presently the spokesperson for the Lebanese

Muslims Association. The information in my submission was based on experiences

that I had when I was either Secretary or Vice-President of the Lebanese

Muslims Association.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you, Mr Trad. Before moving to hearing your evidence, I would like

to thank you for your submission. I would also like to remind you of the

orders we put in place, that you do not identify asylum seekers or you

do not identify third parties in your evidence. If you would like to put

some individual cases to us in evidence, please talk later to the Secretary

to the Inquiry. Now, could I ask you to perhaps deliver an opening statement,

and in particular if I could ask you to talk about your experience with

children in detention centres, or children who have been released from

detention centres.

MR TRAD: Firstly

I'd like to thank you for accepting my submission, and for giving me the

opportunity to speak with you today. I've been asked to only address one

particular issue from my submission, although I raised a number of issues,

and the issue that I've been asked to address is the issue of maintaining

religious and cultural identity. So I've focused my opening words on the

issue of religious and cultural identity.

From a general perspective

cultural identity and heritage are crucial for many reasons, and members

of our community, members of the Muslim community are particularly keen

to learn about their traditions and cultural and religious heritage and

to pass this knowledge on to their children. The significance of learning

one's culture is acknowledged by article 8 of the United Nations Convention

on the Rights of the Child. Under this article Australia must ensure that

every child in Australia regardless of nationality or immigration status

and regardless of how the child arrived in Australia, enjoys access to

their culture and identity without discrimination of any kind.

Under this convention

Australia is obliged to ensure the right of children belonging to ethnic,

religious or linguistic minorities to enjoy their culture, use their language

and practice their religion together with other members of their group.

The convention also recognises the right of parents to provide appropriate

direction and guidance to their children in maintaining their own religion

and culture. People who are detained in a foreign country like the asylum

seekers who come to Australia are generally limited in their level of

access to authentic literature and other references about their culture

and also in their ability to receive culturally sensitive services including

religious services.

As a religious and

welfare organisation the Lebanese Muslims Association received regular

calls in the year 2000 from Muslim asylum seekers requesting visits by

appropriately qualified religious clerics. The visits that we could organise

could only be narrow visits in that not all Muslims in the detention centre

could be brought together but only those named on the visitor application

form. We were quite often asked by asylum seekers to make such visits

and the issue was regularly raised that Christian clerics or counsellors

or Christian counsellors were able to make visits and proselytise to the

asylum seekers.

There were also comments

that the Christian visits are impacting on some of the asylum seekers,

some of the Muslim asylum seekers, in that they are made to feel that

the Christian proselytisers, cared more about the Muslim leaders. Because

the Christian proselytisers were making visits in a formal capacity whereas

Muslim leaders could only make visits to individuals. This aspect has

a greater psychological impact on children as they regularly raise the

question, where is the Imam. Unbeknown to them the Imam was denied access

or similar access to the Christian religious leaders.

In recognition of

this problem his Eminence the Mufti of Australia as a spiritual leader

of Australia's Muslim community took it upon himself to offer his religious

services to the asylum seekers through seeking official permission from

the Minister. The aim and content of these services included to administer

religious and cultural services. To provide religious and cultural instructions.

To provide counselling and solace. To maintain cultural links especially

in the case of children. The Minister for Immigration refused to permit

the Mufti to perform these duties on the ground that this may be seen

as proselytising. The same concern of proselytising did not appear to

stop the Minister from affording the opportunity to Christian groups to

proselytise amongst Muslim asylum seekers. A fact that has been reported

in an ABC Radio interview that was referred to in my submission. Also

in the Christian Southern Cross newspaper also referred to in my submission.

I recall on one of

my visits to Villawood, in or about November 1999, that detained asylum-seekers

complained that other asylum-seekers who had expressed an interest in

Christianity were better looked after and better treated. And rumours

were afloat amongst the asylum-seekers that these people would get a speedy

protection visa.

Now, in support of

some of the statements I have a signed statement by his Eminence the Mufti

explaining his conversation with the Minister in June of 2000 where I

was present. He asked the Minister through myself acting in my capacity

as somebody who speaks both Arabic and English and I was translating for

him. The Mufti confirms what he asked the Minister and what the Minister

replied to him, and the subsequent letter that was sent to the Villawood

Detention Centre requesting an official visit where we would address both

Muslim and Christian detainees.

Now despite being

the spiritual leader of all the Muslims in Australia, a fact that has

been confirmed by the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils on several

occasions - including their recent Congress - the Minister turned around

and said, I don't believe that you represent all the Muslims in Australia.

So, if I allow you to go inside and preach - knowing that you will only

be addressing Muslim asylum-seekers - then you may be proselytising some

to your particular brand of Islam. This was really a shocking statement

to us at that time. That people in the detention centre are free to attend

and listen to the Mufti or not listen to the Mufti or to the representative

of the Mufti. It just seemed to us at the time that there was no respect

shown to the religious leader or to the rights of the asylum-seekers to

receive services and instructions in their religion and culture.

DR OZDOWSKI: Yes,

we will take this document into evidence. Now coming back to your statement,

your experience is limited to Villawood only or you visited some other

detention centres as well?

MR TRAD: I've

only physically visited Villawood but I've had phone contact with asylum-seekers

in Curtain and in Port Hedland and in Woomera. I've visited asylum-seekers,

including children who have been released from Woomera and also from Curtain.

DR OZDOWSKI:

We visited Port Hedland not that long ago and we spoke about the issue

with detainees over there and we saw that there are two separate buildings

used for praying purposes - as mosques. But the detainees over there told

us that it is impossible to attract an Imam to come for a visit. It is

not an issue of access over there, but rather an issue of finding an Imam

who would be available to go there.

MR TRAD: During

our visit with the Minister whose evidence - the Mufti made an offer to

the Minister to go and visit all the detention centres around Australia.

And he was offering that either himself or an Imam that he would choose

would go and spend at least a week at each of these detention centres

from time-to-time. Up to a week, depending on how much the Minister would

permit. And the same answer was given by the Minister. That basically

this would be seen as proselytising.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now you, I assume, requested a number of times access by Imams to different

detention centres?

MR TRAD: There

was the request to the Minister that I mentioned, at his office, and a

subsequent request in writing and follow-up phone calls.

DR OZDOWSKI: It

was only a single request - a request around a single occasion - or numerous

requests?

MR TRAD: It

was only those requests that I mentioned. There was one other instance,

where the National Operations Manager of ACM contacted me personally,

when 600 asylum-seeks in Curtain were on a hunger strike and many had

stitched their lips. We were in consultation with each other as to the

best way of addressing this problem. I suggested a delegation of several

Muslim religious leaders from different denominations to attend and to

provide counselling to the hunger strikers to break the hunger strike.

On that occasion

it was surprising that the ACM Operations Manager was very open to the

suggestion and he was making every step to get official approval. At the

end of the day he said to me that we can only give approval to one person,

not to the others, and the Minister could not be contacted to give that

approval anyway. He is somewhere on the - I think he said on the Gold

Coast at that time. By that stage it was about 9.00 pm at night and the

asylum-seekers did not receive the appropriate counselling on that occasion.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I am in a way surprised that the matter went to the Minister, because

ACM appears to have the operational management of detention facilities.

So at least as far as I understand the system the ACM Manager should be

able to make that decision. But I see it is not your experience, is it?

MR TRAD: I'm

surprised also. We were under the understanding that the ACM Manager makes

that decision and this was why the letter that we sent to Villawood was

addressed to the ACM Manager. However, we were surprised to hear that

he had to refer it to Canberra. I don't know if there is a specific instruction

from the Minister instructing the ACM Manager that requests from Muslim

clerics has to be referred in that manner.

I have to add that

the Mufti can go inside and visit asylum-seekers but on an individual

basis, not as a group of Muslims. And this is a concern. That ACM had

to basically go outside their operational procedures - their normal operational

procedures - to put the request to the Minister and wait for the Minister's

office to give a decision on the matter.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Does he go in and visit on a one-to-one basis?

MR TRAD: He

used to, early in 2000. After that request was made he has not made an

official - he has not made the visit on an individual basis but he has

been taking phone calls from asylum-seekers. I have made visits after

that request was denied, but in a non-official capacity, and on an individual

basis.

DR OZDOWSKI: How

are the religious needs of children catered for in detention centres at

present?

MR TRAD: My

understanding at the moment is that the religious needs are only catered

for by what the parents can provide. We were quite fortunate in - about

a year ago in Villawood that some of the detained asylum-seekers had a

reasonable level of religious knowledge. Some of them had undertaken religious

courses overseas so they were offering some services. But these people

are fellow detainees who are traumatised by the experience of detention

themselves and they were also asking for outsiders to come in there and

administer these religious services. To an extent they are able to provide

some of the need - to meet some of the need, but not to the appropriate

standards. Or not to the standards that are required or requested.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What about access to religious literature? Would people have free access

to the Koran or to other religious literature in a detention situation?

MR TRAD: There

has been no complaint about access to religious literature. And on the

occasions if we were asked - I have not received the request for religious

literature myself - but if we were asked I believe that we could have

provided them, but we have not tried.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What would be the consequences for children of lack of access to religious

education in detention?

MR TRAD: Religious

education, particularly Islamic religious education, has a very strong

emphasis on ethical and moral values, and also on the solace and the values

of patience and perseverance. And being in a traumatised situation like

the detention centres where you need constant counselling and constant

offers of support, compassion and so forth, it just adds to the trauma

if you don't have these services.

With the children

not receiving appropriate and adequate instruction, only having access

to instruction from their parents who are too concerned about their own

plight means that those children are missing at a crucial time in their

life some very important aspects or teachings that are crucial to their

development as human beings at a time that they are so impressionable

that will impact on their life as adults and it is really at this time

that they need as much support as possible from community leaders and

from people who are appropriately qualified in matters of religion and

culture and history.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did you meet some more children and young people after they were released

from detention centres?

MR TRAD: I

have met some of them, not a large number but I have met some, in one

case it was a little girl aged 2, in another case there were several children

aged between 5 and 10.

DR OZDOWSKI:

And did you observe any impact on them of the lack of religious education

in the context of detention centres?

MR TRAD: I

did observe some impact on these children but in the particular case of

the children that I visited that actually had suffered other problems

in detention centres. One of those children who is also in my submission

was the victim of a gang rape by other detainees in Curtin Detention Centre.

So they are already quite traumatised when I visited them and the children

were basically behaving in a way that showed that they do not really have

an understanding of their culture or background or anything like that,

they were just behaving differently.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Mrs Sullivan?

MRS SULLIVAN:

Are there any special provisions made for unaccompanied minors that you're

aware of in terms of cultural maintenance and religious education?

MR TRAD: I

am not aware of any special provisions for unaccompanied minors in terms

of religious education or cultural education.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So when you said it becomes the parents' responsibility these people have

no parents so do the other adults in the centre take any responsibility?

MR TRAD: I

could only make an assumption that some of the other adults would take

on that responsibility and perhaps some of the other adults may even seek

to prey on these children.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And in terms of when the unaccompanied minors are released to the

community I actually asked this question of an earlier group, is there

any focus by your community on the unaccompanied minors who have been

released?

MR TRAD: If

we're advised of an unaccompanied minor who is released then we as a community

have already worked out a program as part of community services a foster

parenting program where we would try and place the unaccompanied minor

with foster parents from their own background but I have not received

a case of that nature in my organisation to date.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So you would need contact from DOCS in order to do that?

MR TRAD: We

would need contact from DOCS or the department. One of the problems that

we have is that when the Department releases someone if the family needs

any community support they will not release them to an organisation that

receives any form of DIMIA funding. Our organisation has a community settlement

officer who is funded by the Department of Immigration so they would not

use us as a point of contact for these matters but previously they were

using an organisation by the name of Supreme Islamic Council of New South

Wales because they are not funded but interestingly the Supreme Islamic

Council came to us to seek financial support to provide for families in

that situation.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So there's a willingness but nothing has actually happened?

MR TRAD: No.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Have these children gone to other foster families to your knowledge?

MR TRAD: The

only case that I know of is that particular family where the organisation

that was enlisted for support came to us for financial assistance and

they are managing that particular case. We are not permitted to manage

it as an organisation through the normal channels, we would have to do

it as executives working on it and this is how I take on these cases as

an executive officer in the organisation but I cannot allocate any of

this work to my staff because one of the staff is funded as a community

settlement officer.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Pardon my ignorance because I don't come from New South Wales but is there

an Islamic schooling process in New South Wales?

MR TRAD: There

are several private schools that also teach, that are run by a Muslim

board and they do impart instruction in the Islamic religion. However,

not all Muslim children go to these schools, many of them including my

own children go to public schools and there are after hours schools that

they can be taken to weekend schools where they can receive special instruction.

They also have full and free access to lectures at the Mosque where they

can be taken to receive religious instructions.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And to your knowledge do any unaccompanied minors go to either the weekend

schools or any of the other opportunities that you are aware of?

MR TRAD: I

don't have any knowledge on that matter.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So how would they get the knowledge that those opportunities are available?

MR TRAD: From

my understanding they would get this knowledge if they are placed with

parents who are from their own background who would understand the importance

of continuing their education or of introducing them to education about

culture, identity and religion.

MRS SULLIVAN:

That's not provided at an exit interview by DIMIA for example?

MR TRAD: Not

to my knowledge.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Professor Thomas?

PROF THOMAS:

To your knowledge do most of the children placed with foster families,

are most of them placed with foster families of Muslim background?

MR TRAD: In

New South Wales, and this is outside the detention centre issue, there

is every effort to place them with foster families form their own background

and the programs are in place to seek Muslim foster parents for Muslim

children. As far as detention centres are concerned I have absolutely

no information as to what happened to the unaccompanied minors who were

given visas.

PROF THOMAS: Thank

you.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Do you have any concluding statement you would like to make?

MR TRAD: I

don't except thank you very much for this opportunity and I hope it all

goes well especially for those unfortunate people in detention centres

and for the children and the minors, thank you very much.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much Mr Trad.

Now, could we ask

Mr Harold Bilboe to come forward. Thank you, Mr Bilboe. I would like to

ask you to take an oath or affirmation.

HAROLD

ARTHUR BILBOE, affirmed [11.33am]

PSYCHOLOGIST PREVIOUSLY WITH ACM AT WOOMERA

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you. Now, could I ask you to give your name, address, qualification

and capacity in which you are appearing for the record.

MR BILBOE:

My name is Harold Arthur Bilboe. I am a psychologist. My address is [address

removed]. I appear here as a psychologist who used to work with ACM at

Woomera in Curtin for approximately 16 months of long term continual contractual

employment from September of 2000 through to January of 2002.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much. Perhaps before we move to hear your evidence, I would

like to remind you that I am asking that you won't identify asylum seekers

and also that you won't identify any the third parties. If you would like

to put individual cases to our attention please talk, after the hearing,

to the Secretary or please put further written submissions. Thank you

very much for your submission. Would you like to make an opening statement

or should we go straight to asking you questions?

MR BILBOE:

I think it would be best if we go straight to asking questions because

I am appearing here as a result of a subpoena.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you. Could you let us know, to start with, why did you leave Woomera?

MR BILBOE: Basically

my contract with ACM was not renewed at Woomera in December, although

I had given indications that I was willing to continue. I was offered

one month at Curtin. At the end of that period, again, no new contract

was offered. I believe - I can give an indication as to why I believe

that that occurred.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What would you think why it wasn't renewed?

MR BILBOE:

Raising too many concerns about what was happening in regards to the emotional,

psychological and physical well-being of both adult detainees and children

who had been in long term detention.

DR OZDOWSKI: You

were raising that with whom?

MR BILBOE: Sorry?

DR OZDOWSKI: With

whom were you raising these concerns?

MR BILBOE: These

concerns were raised with ACM management and also with DIMIA management.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could you tell us what are the main psychological problems facing children

in detention centres?

MR BILBOE: Many

of the children arriving in Australia from countries by boat, or whichever

way they come here, seeking asylum have experienced some form of trauma

in the land that they have left. Many of the unaccompanied minors that

we have in detention had witnessed extremely violent events. Some even

witnessing the murders of family members. I know of particular cases where

children witnessed their families being hit by missiles. So they arrived

here having experienced trauma, having a traumatic experience in the process

of coming here and then being re-traumatised by the very nature of the

detention process.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Are there any strategies in place to assist children with coping with

the fact of being in detention?

MR BILBOE:

It is very difficult to put into place strategies which assist children

who have been traumatised within a traumatic environment. Apart from providing

basic assessment, counselling and supports, shelter, minimalistic education,

minimal health care, within a wire cage, that's basically what's provided.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So what you are saying, as I understand, is that within the detention

centre complex, really the

MR BILBOE:

It's a no-win situation.

DR OZDOWSKI: needs

of kids cannot be taken properly.

MR BILBOE:

Cannot be achieved with long term therapeutic outcomes within that environment.

DR OZDOWSKI: We

heard in some other evidence that basically the role of a psychologist

in detention centre is to assist detainees to keep a holding pattern.

Would it be your experience too?

MR BILBOE:

The primary role of a psychologist, as I perceived it, was a no deaths

in custody policy. That was the aim. It was to achieve that we maintained

a situation where no detainee committed suicide.

DR OZDOWSKI: Is

it an official policy, or it's an understanding, or how does it work?

MR BILBOE: No,

it would not be stated as an official policy, but all the psychologists

are active members of the HRAT Team, which is the High Risk Management

Team, a primary role is to assess risk, to manage detainees who have self-harmed,

self-mutilated or are threatening suicide. I, myself, have witnessed some

horrific injuries on individuals, both adult and children. I have seen

people hanging off the fence and

DR OZDOWSKI:

By the neck?

MR BILBOE:

Hanging off the fence with sheets around their necks. With ACM officers

holding them up, basically, whilst they are cut down. I have seen people

up in trees slashing themselves up with razor blades and I must say that

while I am watching this children have been watching it as well.

DR OZDOWSKI: I

can clearly see it impacted on you, didn't it?

MR BILBOE:

An environment such as this can only impact on a professional when the

professional finds himself in a no-win situation, when the recommendations,

the therapies that they are trying to implement are being thwarted by

the very system that is supposed to be providing a protecting environment.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What would be impact of such involvement of children in your assessment?

MR BILBOE:

Well, my belief is that children arrive after experiencing trauma. The

very nature of detention is traumatising to the extent that we will inherit

children who are exhibiting symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder,

behavioural disturbance and increase social costs in providing care for

these people, as young adults and as older adults.

DR OZDOWSKI: Would

it have a long lasting impact on children, in your professional judgment,

or from the moment they are out will they be able to function normally?

Or within a reasonable period of time after they are released?

MR BILBOE:

I have extensive experience working in child protection prior to coming

into the area where I am now, and I would say that any child who has experienced

a trauma, be it sexual assault, physical assault, will have long term,

life-long, impact. It's what resources are made available to them in the

community afterwards that will diminish the level of that impact. But

there will be a long term impact.

DR OZDOWSKI:

As you know there are, in different states, different child protection

agencies which have legal responsibility, for looking after the well-being

of children. Quite often when you find a child in the broader community

who doesn't attend school or who is in a situation of conflict, or in

some other circumstances, the state authorities take a whole range of

steps to redress, or to address, the situation at least. How would you

compare the children in detention centre to the children in broader community

which attract attention of state officials?

MR BILBOE: There

is an ambiguity here in the legal system because any child in, say, New

South Wales who is living in an environment where they are being, or are

likely to be abused, there are statutory requirements to provide care,

well-being and, in fact, protection for that child. Even to the state

of removing that child from the environment that it is perceived that

it is not safe. I used to fulfil that role as a District Officer. Children

in detention come under some ambiguity because they are not under the

- covered by their State or Territory laws of Child Protection Acts. They

are on Commonwealth ground. Although, in Woomera, after the Flood Inquiry

we started involving FAYS.

It was very unclear

as to what their actual legal actions could be taken by them, as far as

protecting or removing children, because they were under the care of the

Minister of Immigration. Which raised a lot of ambiguities for me, and

probably led to the termination of my employment because I was raising

questions regarding who was the guardian, or the guardian ad litem, for

the unaccompanied minors. Because when you remove a child in New South

Wales, and take them into care, their guardian becomes the Minister for

Community Services. He becomes their parent, ad litem.

DR OZDOWSKI: Yes,

leaving the legal issues on the side, would children in detention facility

approach the definition of an abused child, or child at risk, which would

warrant some investigation if they would be outside detention?

MR BILBOE: Okay.

The definition of child abuse is a child who has been physically abused,

sexually abused, neglected or exposed to physical, exposed to emotional

and psychological risk. Every child in a detention centre fits within

one or more of those categories. Every child.

MS LESNIE:

Does that mean that you notified FAYS as to the risk of every single child

in Woomera?

MR BILBOE:

No, that would never be allowed to happen. FAYS were notified with specific

cases of children who presented with unexplained or injuries with an ambiguous

explanation. After the introduction of the new playgrounds in November

of last year, at Woomera, the beautiful ones that you see in the magazine

there, we had numerous injuries because these children had never played

on playgrounds such as those. They had no idea about appropriate or safe

playing on those grounds and, yes, you have beautiful one and a half inch

matting on top there which looks very pretty, but underneath it is hardpacked

ground. So when they fall off they might as well be landing on concrete.

MS LESNIE:

When you say you wouldn't have been allowed to notify

MR BILBOE:

No, no, it would be not practical. When we did notify FAYS the issue became

of what action could they take to actually intervene. What services could

they provide? Could they remove the children? No. Could they place them

in foster care? No. So it was a case of managing as best we could within

the facilities that we had.

MS LESNIE:

So what you mean is that you would have liked to have notified them but

there was no point because there was no feasible solution to it.

MR BILBOE:

No solution being offered.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So you didn't personally report any individual child?

MR BILBOE: Yes,

I did.

MRS SULLIVAN:

How many?

MR BILBOE:

It would be hard to specify exact numbers, but we notified families with

four or five children. We notified individual children as a team. It would

be in the 20s, 30s of individual children that were notified in South

Australia, going way back to a specific incident last year, the year before

last, which resulted in the Flood Inquiry and through to numerous incidences

last year. A lot of children were notified because of hunger strikes,

self mutilation.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And was each one of those investigated in some way?

MR BILBOE:

Yes. A lot of the investigations were done internally.

MS LESNIE: And

where there was an investigation and recommendations by FAYS were those

recommendations implemented by ACM or DIMIA?

MR BILBOE:

Not to my satisfaction.

MS LESNIE:

Could you give an example?

MR BILBOE: Well,

children who we felt should be removed from the centre, placed in community

foster care. It was only until this year that that's actually started

happening. Even UAMs who had been in detention for several months, they

only basically left detention earlier this year, although there were numerous

concerns regarding self harming, hunger strikes, their exposure to serious

acts of self harm by others, riots, demonstration, destruction of facilities

on a daily basis. What was happening, they were being moved from one compound

to another compound.

We had one child

that was in foster care with a family within the centre with a young child.

We strongly advocated for that child to be released with the family who

he had bonded with. It didn't happen. By the time I left that child had

been with five different families.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now, could you tell us more about self harm? Could you say something about

how often you witnessed it, what ages of children were involved and how

severe it was?

MR BILBOE: Self

harm ranged from incidences by definition of people who were, say, not

presenting for meals. They would come under HRAT, so we would be investigating

why they were not attending for meals. Were they on a hunger strike? A

lot of concerns were raised about children not attending or being on a

hunger strike. This was found in many cases to be untrue, however because

of the parents' level of distress, anxiety, depression, they were not

attending for meals so the children weren't attending.

Arrangements were

made for the children to attend with other detainees where the families

were quite seriously depressed and ill, officers would volunteer to escort

the children to the dining room. I can't say that I ever saw children,

I would say children under the age of, say, 14, who were actually on a

hunger strike. Children over the age of 14 who were involved in hunger

strikes, were mostly UAMs. As far as self harm is concerned in the cutting

area that was used - young children didn't actually have access to razor

blades unless they could get them from an adult.

Some of the UAMs

did have access to razor blades. They became involved in a cutting - now,

I try not to sound blase but the fact that I saw so many varieties of

cutting from superficial scratches to major lacerations, I would describe

theirs as minor scratching, but the fact that they were doing it was of

great concern.

DR OZDOWSKI: How

old were the youngest children doing it?

MR BILBOE:

About 14, that's with the razor blades. The other self harms were - with

the UAMs was becoming involved in the demonstrations, placing themselves

at risk by their involvement in some of the demonstrations. I have seen

young men who turned out to be UAMs cuffed, cuffing is with flexi cuffs.

I don't know if people here are aware of what they look like.

DR OZDOWSKI:

If you could describe it please.

MR BILBOE:

It's basically - it's a piece of plastic with two circles that go round

and through. You put them on a person's wrists and then you pull it to

a tension. You're supposed to pull it to no more than two fingers tight.

So there's no - it can move. The part that is concerning is that in many

cases during demonstrations and riots the cuffing was behind the back.

Persons were cuffed behind.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Including children?

MR BILBOE:

Including young males.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Females?

MR BILBOE: No.

I can't say that I saw a female cuffed at any stage. When they were identified

as being young minors, these cuffs were removed, however marks still existed

on their wrists. There were incidences involving where reports were made

by myself and my colleagues expressing concerns that the injuries sustained

on some of the detainees would raise concerns regarding the excessive

use of force. One needs to remember that the children were witnessing

these events.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now, you mentioned earlier hangings. How did you hear circumstances of

young people or children attempting to hang themselves?

MR BILBOE: I

am not aware of any young children attempting to hang themselves, but

I am aware of young children witnessing these events and seeing people

cut down. There is a specific case that I was involved in, involving a

young boy who became extremely distressed. That young boy was, prior to

my arrival at Woomera in September of 2000, described to me by teachers,

officers and other staff as being a relatively normal child, quiet, a

passive little boy. However he witnessed some very severe riots and demonstrations.

He witnessed a breakout.

He witnessed a person attempting to hang themself in a tree. The child

became extremely traumatised. I was unable to treat that child at Woomera

and made recommendations that that child be transferred. After the family

was rejected, the family was actually transferred into what was the high

security compound at Woomera.

DR OZDOWSKI: The

isolation cells?

MR BILBOE: This

is the - what was referred to as Oscar or Sierra Compound. There were

about four families that were moved into there. With regards to the strongest

possible objections from the psychologists about the inappropriateness

of placing women and children in the compound which was 80, 90 percent

male where a daily occurrence of self harm and self mutilation, threats

of riots. There was one family - this particular child was moved in there

with his family and again witnessed more events and deteriorated drastically

and I recommended that the child be removed from Woomera and I was told,

well, where do we send him? I said, To Sydney, because they have access

to Camperdown Children's Hospital and children's psychiatric services,

because I could not treat that child at Woomera.

Another family involving

three girls was placed in that compound. Those girls never left their

room.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Why was that so?

MR BILBOE: When

you've got about 200 males in a compound with three adolescent girls,

they didn't come outside. They had their meals in their room. We complained

and complained and complained about the inappropriateness of these sorts

of things and the emotional, psychological impact that this has on the

individual children and their families. Eventually the father of that

family signed a Repat and left, went back. He indicated to me that he

expected not to survive himself, but he believed it would be better to

go back and know what was going to happen than to stay here and watch

his family deteriorate.

DR OZDOWSKI: One

more thing regarding self harming, lip sewing, did you witness any of

lip sewing?

MR BILBOE:

I witnessed numerous occasions of lip sewing, going back from 2000/2001,

right through to just before I left. Mostly adults.

DR OZDOWSKI: With

adults, what about children?

MR BILBOE:

I have been asked on occasion did I witness lip stitching with children,

specifically UAMs, etcetera, and stories about adults stitching children's

lips. I only ever heard that statement come from the Minister's lips.

I never saw it at Woomera. I never witnessed it. I never saw any children

who had their lips stitched at Woomera.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Do you know of any parents encouraging children to do any self-harm?

MR BILBOE:

In fact, I only saw parents doing the opposite. Trying to - the interesting

part is that as a psychologist, being there, the time that I had, I had

the opportunity to build up relationships with families. So I was able

to encourage the families to start to change some of the cultural behaviours

which - it seemed that when there was a demonstration the whole family

would come out and watch, women and children, and what we were encouraging

them to do was to take the children back inside so that they were not

witnessing these events. To remove the children from the environments

where they were witnessing these events. Now, I cannot say that I saw

parents, at any stage, encouraging their children to self-harm, or harm

others.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I understand, or I was told, that there is an ACM policy to remove children

from any area of disturbance. Did you see children being removed from

their places when demonstrations were taking place?

MR BILBOE:

I have seen women and children standing at the gate asking to be removed

while the gate is locked. I find that an amazing statement, I am sorry.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes.

MR BILBOE: Because

in the middle of a riot or demonstration, apart from going in with a full-on

CERT team, water cannons, batons and tear gas, it would be impossible.

The only thing that we encouraged people to do, and women and children

to do, was to retreat back to their own rooms and to shut the door and

stay there. On occasions I have walked in with senior officers and escorted

families out, specific families.

DR OZDOWSKI: We

still are waiting for relevant pages of ACM manual to be provided for

evidence on that issue.

MR BILBOE: They

may be in a manual, but it would be impossible to implement.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now, you have possibly seen DIMIA submission, yes, which was provided

MR BILBOE:

Yes, I saw it this morning.

DR OZDOWSKI: outside

and it states that:

Care is taken not

to undermine the role of parents as primary care givers.

Would you wish to

comment on the issue of the role of parents of families in detention?

MR BILBOE:

It would - you cannot undermine the role of a parent as a care giver,

but you can undermine the role of a parent as in what facilities and resources

and services they can provide to their children. When you look at the

Woomera or Curtin environment what the parents can actually provide to

their children is extremely limited. So, apart from escorting the children

to meals, bathing the children, sharing rooms, the day to day care, that

would be about the basic thing that parents could provide.

DR OZDOWSKI: Can

family function normally in extended detention situation? Can family roles

be maintained, according to you?

MR BILBOE:

Family roles break down significantly. We actually started time-lining

the break down of individuals. We classify the first three months as being

a state of euphoria, hope, dreams. The next three months, as they are

going through all of their interviews and there is anxiety starting to

build up. After six months we start to see a deterioration in the emotional

and psychological well-being of individuals, a significant start in the

increase of self-harm. Be it hunger strikes, emotional anxiety, psychological

disturbances developing, increased requests for assistance for sleep,

which is an indication of depression, medication for depression, more

active involvement in disturbances and in self-harm. So, yes, I have seen

people age on a daily basis. I have seen middle age men become old men

in months.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Physically, looking old men, or mentally

MR BILBOE: Physically,

and relationships in the family breaking down because children start to

- are asking, "Why are we in detention? Why are we here?" Wives

asking, you know, "Why have you brought us here?" Wives whose

husbands are outside in the community asking why are they still in detention

when their husbands are outside? Not understanding the system. Young -

UAMs not understanding the system, not having someone to advocate for

them. No independent advocate.

DR OZDOWSKI:

When we go to detention centres quite often people are asking us very

basic questions, then when we ask DIMIA or ACM managers they are telling

us, "Well, we told them five times about X or Y". The question

is; Are they capable, after spending considerable time in detention, to

absorb information which is provided?

MR BILBOE:

There are certain things that they are not told. When immigrants - when

detainees first arrive they go through an initial screening process. There

is a terminology which generally is not used. That's called "screen

in" or "screened out". Detainees are not told that they

are screened in or that they are screened out. They can go three/four

months wondering what's happening until somebody lets them surreptitiously

become aware that there's a form that they can request where they can

apply again for refugee status because during their first interview they

didn't say the magic words that made them qualify to go on to the next

phase of refugee review. They didn't make statements indicating that they

were seeking asylum or that they were being victims of some form of abuse.

DR OZDOWSKI: I

am dominating you a bit, so maybe a last question from me before I will

ask my Assistant Commissioners to ask you a few questions. Did you do

any counselling for DIMIA staff or ACM officers there?

MR BILBOE: Yes,

I did.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What percentage, or how many, how often there was need for it?

MR BILBOE: Whenever

there was a disturbance I was involved in providing debriefing. Critical

incident debriefing, counselling and support. I also provided individual

counselling support to families, to individual staff members and families

outside of the centre. I also provided individual counselling and support

assessment. I wrote reports for management on individual members of staff

on the impact of events that they had been involved in.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So, it tends to suggest to me that they were impacted by working there.

That there was also a psychological harm happening to them?

MR BILBOE: No,

as I said earlier, no person working in a detention centre cannot be impacted

by that system because it is a situation where there appears to be no

outcome or solution, so you are dealing with people - you are dealing

on a day to day basis with individuals who have been traumatised, who

tell you their stories whether you want to believe them or not believe

them. As a psychologist my training is to believe what I am told until

proven otherwise. So I believe the stories that I am being told by these

individuals. I have seen the scars on these individuals from torture that

they have experienced in their homelands, and the officers hear these

stories as well on a day to day basis. Then they are involved in a disturbance

and they see the person who they have built a relationship with involved

in a disturbance, or become a victim of that disturbance, and so it does

have an individual impact, physically, emotionally and psychologically

with them. So, yes, they are impacted by it.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you. Professor Thomas, would you like to ask a question?

PROF THOMAS:

You said that when you arrived at the detention centres you were not provided

with the psychometric tools and you made submissions and requests and

no response was received. Can you tell me what kind of psychometric tools

you requested and you think that you need?

MR BILBOE:

Yes. At the time we didn't have any tools at all apart from very basic

tools which psychologists carry with them, like anxiety tool assessment

or depression scales. There is no specific tools for assessing trauma,

etcetera. I had with me an intern and we investigated, in consultation

with SYCORP, who is a provider of psychometric tools and ACER, another

provider of psychometric tools. We consulted with them regarding the appropriate

tools that could be used within an environment such as Woomera where the

predominant clientele are of non English speaking background.

So we wanted ethnic

and language neutral tools. We provided a list of those tools to management.

At the time it worked out to approximately $2400 for RAVENS, coloured

matrix, etcetera. Tools that were ethnic neutral, language neutral which

would give us an indication of the person's intellectual function, the

level of trauma, anxiety, depression. Therefore, we could make appropriate

referrals for psychiatric follow up or treatment programs, so we could

substantiate our cases because what we were finding as time went by, more

and more we were being called to the Refugee Review Tribunal to give reports

on the psychological well being of individuals and as psychologists our

field is based on clinical assessment, so we need those tools to provide

a clinical assessment and diagnosis treatment programs for individuals.

PROF THOMAS:

Considering the languages of most of the detainees that's what I'm just

wondering, Ravens is really is a cognitive assessment and how do you get

treatment for anxiety depression on the detainees' languages?

MR BILBOE:

There are assessment tools which are language neutral. Sorry, I can't

think of them off the top of my head, there's an ESI which is language

neutral, cultural neutral but before we put the list together we consulted

with the appropriate agencies to say, yes, these were the appropriate

tools and we provided the submission and the costing. Those tools were

never provided.

PROF THOMAS:

You worked at the ACM from October 2000 till December 2001 which probably

was the worst period and then you worked again until February 2002 which

is very recently, did you see any change in ACM procedures during nearly

about two years, did they learn the mistakes, did they improve at all?

MR BILBOE:

Interestingly it went from one extreme, started to move to a much nicer

environment and then came back full circle. I actually arrived at Woomera

on 7 September 2000, at that time it was a very correctional model. In

consultation with the management there, there was a recruitment program

to try and move away from having correctional staff to having detention

staff and for officers to be trained in a detention model.

But over the period

of time and I would say over the latter four months of last year, the

beginning of this year, we moved back towards a more arbitrary correctional

model.

DR OZDOWSKI: Why

is this so? How would you explain that?

MR BILBOE:

I think it was because we are dealing with people, especially within Woomera,

I just use Woomera as the model when I'm speaking, who are now in detention

for anything from 11, 16, 20 months in detention, so the level of reactive

behaviour, I use the old clinical phraseology of reactive behaviour, was

starting to become a daily occurrence. So to manage that reactive behaviour

they wanted people more experienced or more hard line.

That's when I started

writing reports regarding concerns about some of the injuries detainees

were presenting with following incidents would leave ACM open to allegations

of excessive use of force. I know that a number of inquiries were made

regarding that because, as I say, the injuries were not consistent with

just restraining somebody.

PROF THOMAS:

As a psychologist myself that's why I'm concerned about your work and

how effective can a psychologist be in a situation like that, for example,

do you use bags, do you carry with you Taylor's Anxiety Test, how do you

use it? Do you use it with interpreters and without those non-verbal tests,

how do you cope?

MR BILBOE:

I myself have worked overseas in Korea and have had quite extensive experience

of working with interpreters and I had a wonderful relationship with the

interpreters down in Woomera and sometimes I think they already knew what

questions I was going to ask before I asked them because I'd been there

for a while. I think the biggest mistake that ACM has made or with regards

to it, is the fact that they have tended to focus on continually rolling

over staff.

A therapeutic process

of any client is long term, developing a relationship, getting to know

the person's story, getting to know what's happening with that person

and then making appropriate treatment recommendations, etcetera. As I

said, I think and I believe that I did a good job in Woomera while I was

there. I have to believe that for my own well being but I also have to

acknowledge, that I was working in a no win environment because I couldn't

change the environment.

No matter how much

I worked with the clients, I couldn't change the cause of the behaviour,

the course of their stress, it's like having a patient coming into the

hospital with a nail through the hand and you are giving them Pethidine

injections for pain but you don't remove the nail. That's exactly what

is happening in Woomera. You've got people down there with nails through

their hands, we're holding them, we're not treating the cause. So, the

trauma, the torture, the infection is growing. We are not treating it,

we're just containing it. Eventually when those people return to their

homelands, if they don't get temporary visas, they are going to carry

that with them.

PROF THOMAS:

How did you find the relationship between the guards, officers, ACM officers

and the children?

MR BILBOE: From

one extreme to the other. A lot of the children learn some very basic

Australian English words, inappropriate words within the first few weeks

of being in Australia basically because they are being told to go away

but not in those words. They learnt to swear very fast, so they learn

quite vulgar language very quickly. But again, you cannot charge all officers

by the behaviour of a few.

Many of the officers

that I worked with, I'd work with them any day. They are doing the best

they can within a very hostile environment and the officers cannot change

the environment. But then again, you have the other officers who give

them an opportunity to bash somebody's head and they will, no qualms about.

So you are going from one extreme to the other.

PROF THOMAS:

Let's take the officers who are professional, who are human being or caring,

over time did you observe any change in their behaviour as a result of

the work there?

MR BILBOE:

I found many of the female officers became more and more distressed in

working in that environment as they saw families and children deteriorate

it had an impact on them. Some of the males became more aggressive, drinking

behaviour became a major problem, excessive consumption of alcohol is

quite common. Other nocturnal behaviour starts to appear, so yes, there

is a deterioration within relationships within the officers as well and

a deterioration in behaviour.

MS LESNIE:

Did that impact on the relationship between those officers and the children

and the families?

MR BILBOE:

It impacted in that they became more withdrawn from their interactions

with the detainees because you build up a relationship with a detainee,

you think you are helping that person and because of something that is

said by a DIMIA officer you have a riot that evening. So you are in there

a couple of hours later in riot gear trying to contain a situation which

wasn't created by you but you are now confronted with the person who you

thought was your friend throwing stones at you or trying to hit you with

a piece of wood and you are there with a shield, a water can and batons

trying to contain, yes, it's a love/hate situation.

One minute you love

each other and the next minute you are there you hate each other. But

I've had detainees come and apologise for their behaviour. The only time

I was ever assaulted myself at Woomera was when I was forced to wear an

officer's uniform, that's the only time in my whole experience that I

was

DR OZDOWSKI:

That's in a way interesting but for us it was quite surprising to see

teachers, psychologists and so on in ACM uniforms. You are saying you

didn't wear one?

MR BILBOE:

I didn't wear a uniform up until the last four months of my being - -

-

DR OZDOWSKI:

Why it was a change?

MR BILBOE:

Change of management.

DR OZDOWSKI:

All right, so new management required you to wear it?

MR BILBOE:

A directive from Sydney to wear a uniform although I was told by another

senior executive officer at Woomera that I didn't, I wasn't required to

wear a uniform. I could wear my, even if I wore a uniform I could wear

whatever ties I liked because they wanted me to not be seen as an officer

but I was directed to wear a uniform. I complied and within a couple of

weeks I was actually, there was a riot and basically I couldn't run fast

enough.

PROF THOMAS:

Did you see any abuse of power by the staff? I was thinking of experiments

really we all know?

MR BILBOE:

As I said I have written reports expressing concerns regarding the excessive

use of force. I was approached by one ACM manager following a riot asking

me did I feel that the officers had crossed the line and I did say at

that stage that no, I did not feel that there was an excessive use of

force on that day. However, a couple of days later I did see an officer

restraining person drop down on to that person's back with their knee.

Now, it doesn't take six officers to restrain one person and then to have

another one come along and drop down on that person with their knee. That

matter was reported.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Mrs Sullivan.

MRS SULLIVAN:

I just wanted to focus on one element of life in the centre and that's

the accommodation. What impact do you think that type of accommodation

has on children specifically but family life more generally?

MR BILBOE:

There is no family accommodation at Woomera. You have demountables, you

have the old concrete block buildings down there. Most of the accommodation

is shared. The ones where you may have a family, the only difference is

it's an open room and they may string up blankets or something like that

to create a division for some privacy. In the new compounds they built

rooms which are basically dormitories, no doors apart from a door at either

end where you enter and leave the building, so you have a common lounge

room area with a sink and a refrigerator, no stove, TV which is another

thing which is not relatively common; TVs and newspapers were only introduced

last year, they weren't there when I first arrived, but these accommodations

are 16 bed dormitories so you may have four, five families in the one

dormitory. So there's no accommodation which is a family specific accommodation,

even back in the old days. When I first came to Australia as a child we

had the old Nissan huts, we had family accommodation which parents had

their room, we had ours. That doesn't exist.

DR OZDOWSKI: Sorry,

let's not include that.

MR BILBOE:

No, you have toilet blocks, laundry blocks, so you have to walk across

the compound night or day if you want to go to the bathroom.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So if you have a few kids, during the night it could be - - -

MR BILBOE:

In Woomera there are four, I think it's four units for new borns and that's

for only for six months. So if you have someone who has a newborn child

they get, go into there. It has an en suite bathroom but, again, you may

have one couple in this one room, you have an en suite in the middle and

another room at the other end, so you may have two families with new born

children using that one bathroom, so it's not specific to, it's not like

your own little demountable. It would be nice if we had something like

the modern caravan parks where you have the little demountable huts with

their own en suites and bathrooms, especially for young couples with kids.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So the impact on family life in summary?

MR BILBOE:

If it continues for a long time which most of the ones who are in Woomera

are now, I can only perceive long term detrimental impact on the family,

an increase in relationship breakdown and an increase in appropriate delinquent

behaviour within the children with possible long term post traumatic stress

disorders both in the adults and children.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I perhaps follow with one question here. Quite often when the issue of

releasing children from detention facility dates come into public the

minister is saying that okay the Convention on the Rights of the Child

is saying the children should be detained for as short as possible period

of time and as a matter of last resort. The Convention is also quite strong

on the family unit, that the family should be kept together so, consequently,

the Minister is reaching the conclusion that children shouldn't be released

from the family situation because it would be breaking family down. What

you are saying is that possibly the family is already broken down, isn't

it? How would you manage it, these two objectives?

MR BILBOE:

One of the best suggestions I ever heard actually came from a Country

Party member during the last election campaign when he was saying or suggested

that these families should be put out into rural communities in voluntary

detention so they actually live in a rural community in a voluntary detention

situation but they agree to stay within that community while their applications

are processed. I have no objection with detention, don't get me wrong,

I have no objection with detention for its original purpose which is clearance

for medical screening such as for disease, stuff like that, but when you're

talking about detention that's gone three months, six months, twelve months,

two years, I have serious professional concerned about the psychological

well being of not only the children but every individual within those

detention centres.

Primarily my concern

being here today and one of the reasons why I cane here was UAMs. UAMs

in detention. It's only this year that UAMs have been fostered out. It

wasn't happening before that. It's only because of the level of publicity

that's been going on that that has occurred. One question I ask is, we

talk about your children in detention: who is the guardian of the UAMs,

who is their guardian ad litem? Who is there advocate when they first

arrive? When they have their first hearing there is no one there to guide

them, no one there to help them.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I think the immigration submission is saying that there is a case management

for each UAM that as soon as they arrive they are being assessed and managed

throughout the system. Are you aware of this?

MR BILBOE:

Who is their case manager?

DR OZDOWSKI:

I assume it would be ACM officers.

MS LESNIE:

A DIMIA manager. What the DIMIA submission says is that there's an appointment

of a UAM officer, a particular officer - - -

MR BILBOE:

UAM officers are changed on a rotary basis, they are only a relatively

new occurrence. A UAM officer is responsible for the day to day care of

the UAM. They do not attend hearings, they do not attend their meeting

with DIMIA, they are not trained in advocacy, they are not trained welfare

psychologists, they are not trained in legal affairs, they are not advocates,

they are not independent, they are employees of ACM who are contractual

to DIMIA, so they are not an independent advocate. My question is who

is their independent advocate appointed by their guardian. Their guardian

is the minister, he is to all intents and purpose their father, you know.

In New South Wales, in a community situation he probably would find himself

before a children's court.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Do you have anything further?

MRS SULLIVAN:

Just one brief one. I guess there's been a refrain through your statements

of being blocked, your advice being blocked or not taken notice of. Are

you able to identify the source of that blockage or was it multitudinous?

MR BILBOE:

It's a multitudinal thing. When you make too many complaints whether you're

a nurse, a doctor, psychologist, your contract doesn't get renewed, basically

that's what happens with it. So when doctors - I have witnessed this -

doctors make complaints about the inappropriate medical treatment their

contracts don't get renewed. When nurses complain their contracts don't

get renewed. When psychologists complain their contracts don't get renewed.

MRS SULLIVAN:

You're currently working in a correctional centre?

MR BILBOE: Yes.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Can I ask whether the same culture prevails in other institutional settings

that you have worked in?

DR OZDOWSKI: How

does it compare?

MR BILBOE:

I was very specific in my acceptance of this appointment. I didn't want

to work in a gaol environment ever again. The position that I've accepted

is a psychologist within a pre-release correctional facility. I am working

with people who know when they are going to be released and are preparing

to go back out into the community so we know where we're going, we know

what we're trying to achieve, we're developing their day, not week; they

are developing their own plans for when they go back out into the community

so as to minimise the risk of re-offending. They don't want to come back

to gaol. So we've actually got a goal we can focus on which is what you

don't have in detention.

MRS SULLIVAN:

I will ask it one more way. Given institutional cultures is there anything

atypical about detention centres in terms of your experience or would

you be likely to have those experiences of blockage if you worked in other

institutions?

MR BILBOE:

I think what's atypical about detention is the lack of knowledge. You

don't know if, when, you are going to get released. I could be seeing

someone this afternoon and tomorrow they're gone and it was only the middle

of last year that we finally got DIMIA to start to let us know when people

were being released so I could write discharge reports that could go with

them, with their medical certificates and their referrals to their doctors

so that doctors would get a report from me as a treating psychologist

recommending any follow ups that might be needed, any further treatments

or provisional diagnoses that I have made. So it's been an evolutionary

thing within the detention system but basically I would say over last

eight months it seems to have deteriorated.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Thank you and as a non psychologist I did get the message of your tie.

MR BILBOE:

That's one of the things I do get commented on, is my ties and my vests.

It seems to be my trademark.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did you work in a prison before?

MR BILBOE:

No. I never worked in detentions or gaols before working with ACM. Prior

to that I worked in a hospital, mental health, community mental health,

child protection.

DR OZDOWSKI:

We will have to conclude. Would you like to make a concluding statement?

MR BILBOE: Only

that I hope the information that I've provided is of assistance to you.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much, Mr Bilboe it is of assistance. Now, the final session

will be held in camera.

SHORT BREAK [12.28pm]

CONTINUED IN TRANSCRIPT-IN-CONFIDENCE

CONTINUED FROM

TRANSCRIPT-IN-CONFIDENCE [2.05pm]

DR OZDOWSKI: Well,

I would like to start the afternoon hearings. My name is Sev Ozdowski

and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner and I've got two Assistant Commissioners

with me. Mrs Robin Sullivan, Queensland Children's Commissioner, to the

left, and Dr Trang Thomas who is a Professor of Psychology at the Royal

Melbourne Institute of Technology, to my right. I am also assisted by

Ms Vanessa Lesnie who is Secretary to the Inquiry.

I made some rulings

about confidentiality about individual information to protect the privacy

of people and I would like to ask that in evidence no names are mentioned.

Either of refugees or said parties who will not have an opportunity to

address this hearing. To start with I would like to ask you to take an

oath of affirmation.

PAULA CRISTOFFANINI,

affirmed [2.06pm]

SENIOR MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

STEVE KARAS, sworn

[2.06pm]

PRINCIPAL MEMBER OF THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

MARK MANTLE, affirmed

[2.06pm]

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COUNTRY RESEARCH AT THE REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

DR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you very much. Now, could I ask your for the records to state your names,

addresses, qualifications and the capacity in which you are appearing?

MR KARAS: Steve

Karas, Principal Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal in Sydney. And

on my right is - do you want me to introduce them, Mr Chairman?

DR OZDOWSKI: I

think they can do it for themselves.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

I am a Senior Member of the Refugee Review Tribunal. Did you want the

addresses did you say?

DR OZDOWSKI:

Addresses, yes please give your address.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

[Address removed].

MR MANTLE:

My name is Mark Mantle, I am the Assistant Director of Country Research

at the Refugee Review Tribunal in Sydney and my address is [address removed].

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much. Mr Karas, could I ask you to make an opening statement?

MR KARAS:

Yes thank you, Mr Chairman, I was going to ask your permission to do so

since you've invited me - thank you very much for the invitation - to

give evidence to the inquiry here this afternoon. You have already had

introduced to you the people who are accompanying me. Paula Cristoffanini

is accompanying me because she is experienced in the conduct of cases

and hearings for applicants in detention, many of whom include families

with children. I've asked her to come along in case she can be of assistance

to the Tribunal.

Mr Mantle is the

head of our research area in the Tribunal. One of the reasons I had asked

him along is that I noticed in some of the submissions that you had received

there were some suggestions that the Tribunal's country information resources

are limited, or narrow. I wanted to point out to yourself, Mr Chairman,

and to the other Commissioners that in fact that is incorrect and I wanted

to assure the Inquiry that the resources available to Tribunal members

for country research are very extensive and that the members draw on a

very wide range of information available from the government, from NGO,

academic and other sources. I have asked Mr Mantle to elaborate on that

should you want him to later on.

To assist the Inquiry

I have prepared three documents and there are also some other documents

which I would like to give you, but I would just like to refer quickly

and briefly to the three documents that we have prepared for yourself

and the other Commissioners. The first is a brief guide to the Tribunal's

roles and procedures. It is by no means a comprehensive document in relation

to them but I think it will provide you with an overview of the role and

functions of the Tribunal.

The second document

responds to your request for information on various matters which were

set-out in your letter to me of 8 July 2002. And we're quite happy to

speak to it and take whatever questions you'd like to ask of myself and

the others here with me. The Guide to Procedures I've provided may assist

in setting the broader context for responses to your particular questions

which were set-out in that letter which I've just referred to.

The third document

which we will provide to you contains statistical information on minors

in detention who have had reviews before the Tribunal over the last three

financial years. I think you will see from those statistics that this

category of cases has been less than about two per cent of the overall

case-load for the Tribunal during those years.

If I could just make

a few further comments before turning to your questions, Mr Chairman.

You would be aware that the Refugee Review Tribunal has been described

as an inquisitorial or non-adversarial Tribunal. As a result of that it

is one where there is no adversarial conduct of cases and the members

themselves do have quite a role in eliciting information and evidence

before them.

I would like to emphasise

a couple of points if I may, Mr Chairman. First that the Tribunal is not

an appeal body as such. It's confined, simply, to determining if there

has been some error by the primary decision-maker. In other words, the

Tribunal - to use a common description of its role as a merits review

body - stands in the shoes of the original decision-maker and reconsiders

the matter afresh. That is, it provides a merits review.

Secondly, there is

no onus of proof on the applicant. In other words, the person isn't asked

to prove whether he or she is a refugee. It is the Tribunal's role to

examine all of the evidence, make its own inquiries if necessary, and

be satisfied that the applicant is entitled to Australia's protection

under the Refugee Convention.

My third point, Mr

Chairman, is that the Tribunal is bound to apply the laws of Australia

- as enacted by Parliament and as interpreted by the Courts - when determining

if a person is a refugee. The term "refugee" is, not unsurprisingly,

used by many in the media and the community to describe a range of people

whose circumstances may be unfortunate, indeed tragic. However, the Tribunal

has no power to make a decision that a person is entitled to Australia's

protection purely on the basis of compassionate or humanitarian grounds.

Nor can the Tribunal make assumptions or decisions about broad groups

of people. Each applicant's case is assessed on its individual merits.

Mr Chairman, Parliament

has determined that applicants have no right of representation in the

Tribunal. In practice, however, I wanted to inform yourself and the other

Commissioners, that applicant's representatives are given an opportunity

to make submissions before, during and after any hearing. Again, in practice,

no representative of the Department attends the hearing although the Secretary

may, on occasions, make submissions to the Tribunal and the Secretary

has done so from time-to-time in relation to conditions in certain countries

for example.

There will always

be a debate about the merits of an inquisitorial process compared to an

adversarial process but, as I have indicated, the Australian Parliament

has opted for an inquisitorial model. Primarily because I think it is

seen as a quicker, more efficient and fairer model for applicants who

are usually unable, or unlikely, to be able to afford the cost of formal

representation before an adversarial body. Of course, you would be aware,

that the inquisitorial Tribunal that the Refugee Review Tribunal is also

similar to other merits Tribunals.

Could I also turn

to the issue of members' independence? The Tribunal members are completely

independent from direction as to how they decide a case. Neither I, the

Minister, or anyone can tell a Member what evidence to accept, or reject,

or what decision to make. Members are appointed by the Governor-General

for fixed terms of up to five years and of the present members on the

Tribunal, most were appointed in July 2001 and have three-year terms expiring

in July 2004.

If I may, Mr Chairman,

I would just like to take the opportunity to refer to some comments made

by the Law Society of New South Wales and the Beijing Committee - being

I understand a joint committee of the International Committee of Jurists

Western Australia Chapter and the Womens Lawyers Incorporated Western

Australia - which appear in submissions of those two organisations to

your Inquiry.

First the Law Society's

submission incorrectly states that performance reviews of members are

conducted on a six monthly basis and that those members' remittal rates,

and I think by remittal rates the reference is really to what we call

set aside rates are used as a basis for assessing the member's performance.

I just wanted to inform the Inquiry that members are not subject to six

monthly reviews of the nature described.

While members are

expected to make a certain number of decisions each year and to abide

by the Tribunal member code of conduct, they are independent and ultimately

must make a decision on the facts as they find them and according to law.

Of course as the principal member of the Tribunal I am concerned to ensure

as far as possible that the Tribunal's decisions are consistent. To achieve

this members are required to participate in professional development and

training programs and to acquaint themselves with current and relevant

information about applicants' countries.

The Beijing committee's

submission suggests that the Tribunal has little investigative capabilities

and resources and I wanted to inform the Inquiry that this is quite wrong.

The Tribunal has attained an international reputation as having an outstanding

independent research capability. The Tribunal research area recently hosted

a conference of country researchers from a wide range of refugee determination

agencies from far as afield as Canada, a number of European countries,

Norway, Switzerland, the United States and New Zealand, at which our activities

received widespread professional praise.

Indeed one of our

researchers is currently in Dublin assisting the Irish government's refugee

determination authorities in establishing a country information research

facility in that country. Mr Chairman and commissioners thank you for

the opportunity to make those preliminary observations. I and my colleagues

are here and we're happy to answer any questions which you may have and

if we are unable to answer them we are quite happy to take them on notice

and make that information available to you.

Should you require

any clarification of any matters or if you want something further as you

develop your final report by all means do not hesitate to contact the

Tribunal.

MR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you Mr Karas. Possibly the best way of handling your submission

would be to take the three documents you mentioned into evidence and to

consider them and if we have any questions which relate to these three

documents

MR KARAS:

I am just handing now to you a number of documents which we have prepared

for you which do contain some statistical information, some documentation

like brochures which the Tribunal has, a couple of letters which we do

sent out to applicants as such, also a multilingual sheet which is an

attachment there and general information which we think will be of assistance

to you and I have got an extra copy here should you want one.

MR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you. The documents are taken into evidence and I reserve the right to

write to you and ask you some explanatory questions if it is needed.

MR KARAS:

Of course Mr Chairman, thank you.

MR OZDOWSKI: Could

I ask Mr Mantle to mention a few words about the country specific assessments,

how do you do the research, how do you go about it.

MR MANTLE: How

we go about it?

MR OZDOWSKI:

And if you could maybe focus on a group of Sabean Mandaeans because they

are people who we were meeting recently in the centres and they were expressing

various concerns to us so could you perhaps describe the process?

MR MANTLE:

Well there are two streams of research we would undertake in the country

research. One stream is where we go out and collect information generally

on countries of origin and countries involved in the refugee determination

process. That forms about half of our work. The other half revolves around

responding directly to questions from members, specific questions about

cases and applicants that they would be working on.

MR OZDOWSKI: Where

do you collect information from?

MR MANTLE: We

have quite a wide range of sources. I think it is better if I categorise

them by group. First, from government sources, that is our own Department

of Foreign Affairs who provide advice; Immigration and Refugee Board of

Canada; US Department of State; UK Home Office; European governments:

Danish Immigration Service springs to mind, they conduct fact finding

missions in countries, we have access to their reports.

We also refer to

various NGOs, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, minority rights

groups, organisations like that who release material; UNHCR of course,

we also have a good relationship with them and source material from them.

We have access to CISNET which is the Department of Immigration and Multicultural

and Indigenous Affairs country information database.

We also subscribe

to an online use retrieval database called FACTIVA which has some 8,000

newspapers, journals, magazines and material that we can access from our

own desktops. We have in the last couple of years developed quite a strong

network of both local and international academics that we can call upon

to give expert advice. We can task UNHCR and the International Organisation

for Migration amongst others and ask specific questions of them, and they

provide advice to us. Most of the material we collect we store on our

own databases so it can be referenced whenever possible or we go externally,

as I said, to outside agencies for help.

Now regarding your

questions about Sabean Mandaeans, the way our research unit is structured

we have a total of 17 research staff across Sydney and Melbourne. In the

Sydney office we have three discrete teams that look after different parts

of the world. One teams looks after the Middle East and there are four

researchers involved in that team because the Middle East comprises quite

a high level of workload for that area. The researchers would search the

sources that I described earlier, for specific material on Sabean Mandaeans.

I could not answer

off the top of my head what that is I would have to go back to our office

and collect the material, but I would be more than happy to provide the

kind of material that we've gathered on Sabean Mandaneans.

MR OZDOWSKI: I

would like to ask you to take this question on notice and to provide us

with this information.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Can I just say that of course the members may have collected some

information by themselves as well so whilst the research group might be

able to give you a list of things that they have collected, it may not

be an exhaustive list of sources used by the Tribunal as their total in

cases relating to Sabean Mandaeans. For example, then you have - because

I have taken some cases involved with Sabean Mandaeans who have great

differences as well whether you are talking about Iraq or Iran and so

on. So then you are going to have specific information as to their situation

in Iran or their situation in Iraq and so on.

MR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you. So in the time remaining I would like to focus on a few issues and

would like to ask you Mr Karas to focus on the issues relating to people

who are in detention. I am not interested in your overall responsibility

for all cases. Could you perhaps put some lines on the time factors. How

long does it take on average to process applications coming from people

from detention?

MR KARAS:

Well over the years, the last three years it has varied from about 67.7

days to 75.1 days for the current financial year. The reason why I mention

those days is we have an internal target if I can use that expression,

in relation to dealing with detention cases within 70 days of the application

coming to the Tribunal. When the application does come to the Tribunal

of course we have to go back to the department to get the department file,

then the matter is allocated to a member and the member is expected to

complete the matter within 70 days of receipt of

MR OZDOWSKI: From

the of allocation?

MR KARAS: From

the moment of allocation to the member and I am able to say that this

past year 2001/2002 financial year, just a little over 73 per cent of

the cases were completed within that time period and we're talking about

84 detention applications for that year.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Sorry, they are only the ones involving children.

MR KARAS:

Sorry that is what I was referring to or did you mean overall

MR OZDOWSKI:

That's fine.

MR KARAS:

I was talking about children in detention I thought that was the subject

of the Inquiry.

MR OZDOWSKI:

And what kind of cases didn't meet that 70 days requirement?

MR KARAS:

Sorry when you say what type of case

MR OZDOWSKI: Yes,

you said about 70 per cent were finished within the time

MR KARAS:

Yes, well others may be extended a little longer on the basis that they

were waiting for other information to come in, people may not have been,

or the applicants may not have been ready for a hearing if one was being

organised. In most cases, in fact I think in all of the cases to which

I have been referring to, the 84 cases that we had this year, they have

been represented and it may have been also that a representative may not

have been ready and the representative may have wanted to make submissions

or so but usually there is an onus on members to deliver a decision within

70 days of the matter being allocated to them and as I've said in a little

over 73 per cent of the cases we've been able to meet that.

DR OZDOWSKI: What

were the longest cases in this category?

MR KARAS:

I don't have that in front of me but I don't think - it would have been

around about the 100 days or thereabouts.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I see, so it's not a question of a year or two, it's a question of

MR KARAS:

No, it's not a question of a year or two, in fact I have heard that there

have been suggestion that cases with the Tribunal have involved people

who have been in detention for a couple of years but that may include,

Mr Chairman, the decision having been made by the Tribunal then a delay

and it going to the Federal Court and then coming back from the Federal

Court to the Tribunal for the matter to be re-heard again or re-dealt

with again.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now, looking

MS LESNIE: Sorry,

could I just ask, do people from the - the detainees in question come

to the hearings at the RRT?

MR KARAS:

No. In the past

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Detainees come to the hearing

MS LESNIE: So

people might be flown from Port Hedland to Sydney or

MR KARAS:

No. In the past members had gone to detention centres but now the majority

of cases are dealt with by video conferencing facilities. Detention centres

do have video conferencing facilities, we do have them at the Tribunal

and for that reason they're dealt with in that manner.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

The detainees in Villawood or in Melbourne detention centres would

attend in person.

MS LESNIE:

Have you noticed any differences in holding hearings by video conference

as opposed to in person?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Do you want me to answer that? We've actually been asked that on several

occasions particularly when we started doing cases in bulk by video. We

were asked by the liaison committee to look at that and if anything what

it showed us, the statistics showed that there was a slightly higher success

rate for people who had had hearings by video but I don't think it was

a particularly significant. But we have looked at that.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Your submission notes that in the procedural guide for members you mention

this, there is a special chapter which provides otherwise on the consideration

of cases involving minors as applicants. Could you let me know when this

chapter was included?

MR KARAS: Yes,

I could. I think it may have been around 2000 or thereabouts but I stand

to be corrected on it and might I inform you, Mr Chairman, that the Tribunal

is about to complete guidelines for taking evidence from children. We've

been working on that for some months now. It's almost completed, we're

just waiting on a couple of more comments to come in from some members

or so and when that is completed I'm happy to make a copy available to

the Inquiry.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

The procedural guide was October 2001.

MR KARAS:

October 2001.

DR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you.

MRS SULLIVAN:

In developing those guidelines for questioning children and young people

have you used other similar documentation as precedent or have you started

with a blank sheet of paper?

MR KARAS:

It's been a sort of joint effort between the Migration Review Tribunal

and the Refugee Review Tribunal which I'm principal member of the both

and the reason for that is that it arises on both Tribunals to take in

requests from people or children and as a result of that it was thought

best that it be a joint effort and the compilation of the paper I understand

may have drawn on these references to cases and things of that type and

it's one which we think would adequately cover the circumstances with

which we have to deal with.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Because there are a number of similar documents in other jurisdictions

and I guess my second question is, has that document been sent out to

critical friends including some obvious people who were interested in

the child advocacy area?

MR KARAS:

No, not at this stage. It's been within the Tribunal and as I say we're

just waiting on comments from the members as such.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Is it the intent to send it to a wider audience?

MR KARAS:

It wasn't intended because it's an internal document which would be available

for members as a guideline, much as is our member's handbook and the other

material as such but we'd be happy to make copies available to you as

I said once it's completed, which I expect will be in the next week or

two.

DR OZDOWSKI: What

practical measures are involved when you are dealing with

MR KARAS:

It talks about sensitivities, you know, treating the children with concern

and that sort of thing; practical examples, Mr Chairman, of how one can

not so much appear friendly but put the person at ease, the child at ease

and take into account that it is a child.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did members have any training in this area?

MR KARAS:

Members do have training as I mentioned in my opening statement on professional

basis as such and we do invite people in from the torture and trauma associations

and other similar bodies to address the members from time to time. Paula

is involved more heavily than I in that and she may wish to add something.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Certainly there was an emphasis at the last training session of torture

and trauma on the issue of taking evidence from minors but it is also

emphasised to members that they need to be satisfied that they have been

able to obtain information, evidence, freely so that's something that

members are very, you know, concerned to do and make sure that they do

at hearings; whether it is from adults who have particular requirements

or from minors.

DR OZDOWSKI:

In your experience of dealing with unaccompanied minors was there sufficient

legal assistance provided to them?

MR KARAS:

I think in all of the cases that have come before the Tribunal they've

always been represented, Mr Chairman.

DR OZDOWSKI:

All of them?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

All of them.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Now, when you are dealing with minors are you taking into consideration

their mental state? We have had much evidence that they are severely traumatised

through the detention system. Do you consider it when you're talking to

them?

MR KARAS: If

you mean do we call for a mental evaluation or so, I would say that as

a matter of course that wouldn't be done unless there was something specific

in relation to a member conducting a hearing that that person thought

that they may have needed some medical evaluations or assessment or so.

I don't think in the normal course of events they would.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

You wouldn't necessarily but I mean you would need to be satisfied that

their witness is able to give evidence.

MR KARAS: Understand

the question, understand the oath and all that sort of thing and if one

wasn't then one wouldn't proceed to take evidence from the child one would

assume.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

And I think it's important to understand that some of the minors who are

listed here having, you know, in detention would be accompanied by their

elders, I mean their parents or other older applicants and so you may

not need to take evidence necessarily so the fact that there's been 84

cases or so on it may not mean that you've taken evidence from all of

those children. You might have taken evidence from the parents for example.

MS LESNIE:

How do you decide when you're taking evidence from the children and when

from the parents and when both?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Okay. I mean generally the Tribunal member needs to make a decision

as to because they have a responsibility to make the relevant inquiries

if you've been able to satisfy the inquiries by taking evidence from the

adults that is sufficient, well, that's fine. It is for the applicants

themselves also to determine who's going to come to the hearing or not,

so for example when you would have - you invite applicants to a hearing

all the applicants will be nominated but it would be up to them whether

they want to attend the hearings so you may have the situation of a family

where you have the two adult applicants attending the hearing and the

children not necessarily involved.

MS LESNIE:

And that will be their decision rather than yours?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Yes. That might be their decision and the Tribunal member for example

if there was an issue that they wanted to pursue they may discuss with

their adult applicant, I would like to also take evidence from your child.

There might be other instances where, you know, you're talking about an

infant, there'd be no point in pursuing it.

DR OZDOWSKI:

The last question from me before I will ask my Assistant Commissioners

to put their questions. I understand that last financial year about 70

per cent of all decisions regarding Afghanis were set aside and about

87 per cent of all decisions relating Iraqis and my understanding is also

that when one looks at other ethnic communities only eight per cent of

decisions were set aside. Could you explain this major discrepancy regarding

decisions from other communities and from Afghani and Iraqi communities?

MR KARAS:

Well, as I tried to indicate, each case has to be decided on the individual

facts of that particular case as such. I think I did indicate that we

don't decide it on the basis of broad groupings and things of that type

and I think you will find in looking at the statistics that on occasions

there are sort of peaks and troughs, so to speak, when and there are two

examples you have given where the particular applicants in those particular

circumstances were able to show that from the evidence Australia owed

them protection, that was found to be the case; whereas, if you look at

other countries and other groupings, sorry, other countries which have

applicants or their nationals coming before the Tribunals because of the

evidence and the circumstances as presented it's found that Australia

doesn't owe them obligations and that can explain the discrepancies in

the figures in cases like Iran and Afghanistan where you've mentioned

they were particularly high and in other countries, for argument's sake,

Fiji or the Philippines, they might be as low as you've indicated or even

lower.

MR MANTLE:

From a research perspective with regard to Afghanistan, the period you

are talking about, the situation was quite volatile, it was fluid, the

information coming out of Afghanistan was still of mixed quality. I think

certain members were of the opinion that allowing for the information

coming out of Afghanistan at that time they weren't convinced that the

applicants weren't at risk in returning to Afghanistan.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

The other thing is there is an issue to do also with the applicants themselves.

For example, in the case of Malaysia 701 applicants who were invited to

appear did not come to a hearing, only 124 applicants came to a hearing,

so they are people who have chosen for reasons of their own not to pursue

their case beyond the application.

DR OZDOWSKI:

But here it looks that the primary decision maker makes mistakes much

more often in certain ethnic categories than others.

MR KARAS:

Not necessarily. It may be in those circumstances there was more information

provided to the member, to the Tribunal, the passage of time allowed them

to obtain further documentation. Our country research was able to get

information which indicated that perhaps the countries, both of which

we referred to weren't as stable as they may have been in the circumstances.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

And changes in law as well.

DR OZDOWSKI: But

we are talking about three months difference between primary decision

making and the decision you make and looking at Iraq, not really much

has changed during the last few years so I don't think that our knowledge

would that rapidly evolve.

MR KARAS:

As I indicated, we are not there or our role isn't to say that the department

got it wrong, ours is to review the applications that come before us on

the merits and to look at all the facts and circumstances in relation

to it and it maybe, as I've said, that for the reasons of more evidence

other documentations, submissions, period of time that elapsed even though

it may be a couple of months, things that have come in and the member

in dealing with that particular case has come to the conclusion that he

or she has.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you, Mrs Sullivan.

MRS SULLIVAN:

I do apologise if these are simple questions because I haven't had time

to read the documentation you've just tabled but my questions are based

on some experience of another Tribunal and that's the context from which

I'm coming. Presumably you receive the files from the Department and to

assist you in hearing the case afresh, are you confident that you get

all the relevant files?

MR KARAS: Under

the legislation the secretary has to provide all the information to the

Tribunal which is relevant for our determination as such and normally

the whole file is provided.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

That is correct, and if you think that there is another file you can

ask for it.

MR KARAS:

Always ask.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

You'd find that a lot of the cases, a very large proportion of the cases

in detention the applicants themselves are conducting an FOI so they also

have access to most of the information before us and they would be able

to bring to our attention if there was something else that hey felt wasn't

before us.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Including the first record of first interview, they can get access to?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

The very first interview not in all cases. Whatever the notes are on the

file they would have access to, yes.

MR KARAS: Whatever

is on the file.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

You need to sort of discuss that with

MRS SULLIVAN:

No, you would have access though to the record of the first interview?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

We can, the first interview after they arrive there's generally, you

have access to the notes of the interview; in some cases you may want

to go back and have a look at the tape. I just don't know whether they

used to have tapes all along or only recently but it might not necessarily

be on the file when you get the file and if you want, if you need it you

would have to seek it.

MR KARAS:

You would have to ask for it.

MRS SULLIVAN:

I would have thought that's a fairly basic document that one would look

at.

MR KARAS:

We don't attach the tapes of our hearings onto the file as such they're

held elsewhere.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

There is a record

MRS SULLIVAN:

No, I'm talking about in reviewing the case anew one presumably starts

at the first point of the process which is that of initial interview.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Not necessarily, I mean the first point of the process is their application

for refugee status. The initial interview precedes that. See, they have

an interview initially when they first arrive in Australia which is not,

is prior to the application for a protection, so yes, we do have access

to the tapes of the interview relating to the protection application.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And that is a standard part of what you receive?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Yes.

MRS SULLIVAN:

But the person themselves doesn't necessarily have that?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

They would have access to that. What they may not have is access to the

tape if any of the interview that was made when they first arrived within

the first few days of arrival and that is not an interview for the purpose

of their application for protection, it precedes that application for

protection.

MR KARAS:

There's also a statutory requirement on the Tribunal under section 424A

which if there's any material which the Tribunal is going to rely on to

make a finding against the applicant all that has to be made available

to the applicant or their advisers to comment on.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Yes, which is again my previous experiences there's an exchange of

documents so that the applicant sees everything that you have.

MR KARAS:

Yes.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And I was just really going to ask that question: does the applicant see

every document that is in your possession to assist you in making your

decision?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

It may not see every document but it would be made aware of the substance

of the documents in your possession. Say for example you might be referring

to some country information about a particular group of people, if the

information is about the applicant themselves, so if the information is

what comes under 424A, that section of the Act, you would need to make

the substance, I mean, that's what the law requires us to do, to make

the substance of that known and the implications of that so not only are

you relating the substance but also you need to point to the implications

that that material will have in their case.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So it's a judgment of the Tribunal member what in fact is conveyed to

the applicant?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Yes, but not to do so, not to actually provide the substance, how the

implications that it will have for this particular case would be an error

of law so it is very important.

MS LESNIE: How

do you do that when someone is in Port Hedland or Curtin?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

You have to do it in writing, that's what the Act requires you to

do it so you would send that to them and to their advisers.

MS LESNIE:

Are they translated into the language? No. So they all receive them in

English?

MRS SULLIVAN:

So in terms of the implications the person would need to be able to read

English in order to determine what the implications are?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Well, they all have an adviser.

MR KARAS:

And they would have access to translated material and if they are at a

hearing and they require an interpreter the interpreter will be there

and available in the language which they have nominated and during the

hearing it may be that the member will refer to the information and say

that, look, the information before me, independent information, indicates

A, B, C, whereas you said it X, Y, Z, do you have any comment in relation

to that, and that is interpreted back to them so they do understand it.

MRS SULLIVAN:

I also am not aware of the filing system of the Department, but is there

one file, a series of files, what magnitude are we looking at here?

MR KARAS:

Well, the folders are sort of manila folders and however much they can

take and if there's more information obviously there would be a second

and third.

MRS SULLIVAN:

And they're located in different places?

MR KARAS:

I don't know exactly. I would think with the Department, well they're

located somewhere and they are made available to the Tribunal as soon

as an application for review is made.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Assuming there's a file at the detention centre there may well be

a file in central office and there well may be a file at state office,

just for one

MR KARAS:

I'm not sure about that.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

No, I would assume you need to ask them but I mean my impression is

that there is a single file which is the, we see a file.

MR KARAS:

We see a file.

DR OZDOWSKI:

A composite file.

MR KARAS:

No, the file and it will have on the front, sort of notations and initialling

and dates where it's gone from me to you, and you to, you know, Dr Thomas,

and she's given it to, you know, it goes around and it's all notated and

we get that file.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

And it's cross-referenced to anything else that there may be there.

On occasions a compliance file may exist or for example if a person who

has made a prior application comes to Australia and the country of origin,

there might be some notation that allows you to see that a previous application

was made in Jordan at some date at which you can request that file.

MR KARAS:

You can request that file and that material as well.

MRS SULLIVAN:

So do you have a check list as it were on documents that you would expect

to see on that file, and does someone in your office check those off and

say, well document number 32 is missing from this file?

MR KARAS: No,

not in that way. You would expect of course to be an application, documents

supporting the application, submissions from the adviser, statements that

the individuals may have made, if the department has sought information

elsewhere like for argument sake a language analysis or something of that

sort but those records would be on the file, yes.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Very importantly what you still have is a record of the decision that

was made and that decision contains the list of all the materials that

were relied on so I mean, you would have that and you would go back to

that decision and have a look so that would highlight any deficiencies

if there were any and it isn't, it is not my experience that that is an

issue.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Thank you. And my final question relates to an issue that we've had drawn

to our attention in a number of locations and that's the variation date

of birth in a number of documents. My question really is, have you come

across this issue and how do you deal with it because it's of particular

relevance to unaccompanied minors?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

From time to time I mean it really depends, I mean, we certainly get

files that have got all dates in the Iranian calendar for example; another

one, applications that have all, have dates in the Christian calendar,

I mean normally you go and have a look and if there was a question about

a particular date you would seek to understand where the mistake came

from, if any, and you would make some allowance for that if it fitted

in, I mean, with the case if necessary.

MR KARAS:

On occasions you do get official documents that have different dates -

when I say official documents one may be from a church or religious authority

saying a person was born on such-and-such a day, named, baptised or whatever

on that day. Now you get another document which may have a date different

either in the year or the month or so, the Tribunal will make such inquiries

as it can in relation to it and then it just has to make a decision.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

In a lot of Iraqi cases they have the same date of birth, 1st of August

for all people. There was a particular period of time I think because

of the issues to do with the bureaucracy there so you would be relying

on the year.

PROF THOMAS:

When you got to the hearings for family so you would consider they're

all in one? So if, say one parent qualifies as a refugee the whole family

will receive visas then as refugees?

MR KARAS:

If one of the parents did and they were all on the application normally

the finding that one person is, sorry, one of the parents is owed a protection

obligation from Australia means that the rest do.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

But it is up to the Department, so the Tribunal has to make a finding

in relation to all of the applicants. So you have a number of possible

outcomes that one applicant is a refugee and the other ones for example,

there are no claims on which to make a decision. You may have two applicants

make claims and both applicants have been found refugees so two applicants

have made claims and only one person has been found to be a refugee, but

the other persons have been found to be members of the same family. You

may have all the possible combinations of that but then it is up to the

Department in the regulations as to what visas accrue as in the case of

a family unit.

PROF THOMAS:

So, would there be a case when you left say the father with a refugee

visa and reject the rest, children?

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

The Tribunal may be satisfied of the claims of the person but that

doesn't mean to say that they are not going to get visas. For example,

you could have a family made up of two adults, both parties have made

claims, the Tribunal is satisfied of the claims of one but is not satisfied

of the claim of the other party, that is possible.

PROF THOMAS:

Because very often you see a case of family, often the father alone is

a political activist.

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

Sorry?

PROF THOMAS:

That's why when children passive

MS CRISTOFFANINI:

That's right, in that case your decision would be that no claims were

made on behalf of the applicant wife and the applicant children and the

Tribunal is in no position to make, to be satisfied as to their need for

protection. But the decision as to the visa for the family would be that

takes into account the family relationship.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you, Ms Christoffanini, thank you also, for presenting this evidence

and we may follow it up with some further questions in writing. Thank

you.

MR KARAS:

In relation to your question on the Mandaeans, do you just want us to

make that information available to your secretariat?

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes, to the secretariat to the Inquiry. Thank you very much.

Now, I would like

Father Frank Brennan to come forward. Again, Father Brennan, thank you

very much for your submission. I would like to ask you to take an oath.

FATHER FRANK TENISON

BRENNAN, sworn [2.53am]

JESUIT PRIEST AND LAWYER, JESUIT REFUGEE SERVICE AND UNIYA, THE JESUIT

SOCIAL JUSTICE CENTRE

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could I ask you to state for the record your name and qualifications,

address and the capacity in which you are appearing here?

FATHER BRENNAN:

My name is Frank Tennyson Brennan, I am a Jesuit priest and lawyer and

I am appearing for the Jesuit Refugee Service and UNIYA, the Jesuit Social

Justice Centre.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I made a number of orders to protect the privacy of people, so I would

like to ask you in your evidence you are not mentioning the names of refugees

or third parties which are involved with the process of the refugee.

FATHER BRENNAN:

Of course.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I ask you maybe to start with an opening statement.

FATHER BRENNAN:

Yes and it may be of assistance if I provide to the Commission three

copies of the comprehensive correspondence between myself and the government

in relation to the chief matter that I wish to raise.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes, we are taking this into evidence, thank you.

FATHER BRENNAN:

Since I returned to Australia in January, I've been attending Woomera

about every five or six weeks and have had the opportunity to meet with

detainees there and I've also been extended the courtesy of ready access

to the Minister and his office and there have been, as you will see, extensive

communications.

At the outset I would

want to state that I have found the DIMIA officers at Woomera unfailingly

co-operative and helpful but as the correspondence highlights, I think

there are significant problems institutionally in terms of DIMIA in its

operations in Canberra, particularly for the protection of children. If

I might just make some overview remarks before coming to the particular

case study which I think highlights my concerns.

Just following upon

what has been observed by the Refugee Review Tribunal it would be appreciated

by members that a very large percentage of those in detention are people

from Afghanistan and Iraq and, of course, anyone in detention will lodge

an appeal if they lose at the first instance. Therefore, there is a mentality

in place like Woomera, particularly amongst the Afghans and Iraqis that

the Australian process is something of a lottery because the determination

and set aside rate between the primary decision-making phase and the Refugee

Review Tribunal phase is not at all credible.

The further observation

to make is that if you go for example, to the statistics the Minister

quoted to parliament most recently on 26 June when now almost half of

those in detention, as he says, are persons who have been through all

processes, been rejected and are simply waiting to go back home. The significant

problem, particularly for Iraqis and Palistinians is they can't go back

home and there is, of course, as Commissioners would be aware, very good

legal arguments to say that the detention itself is unlawful as being

unconstitutional in accordance with the provisions of Lim's case, no doubt

that will be tested in the near future.

But when you have

a situation of detention of children and families where there is no prospect

of the issue of a visa and there is no prospect of people going home,

you are dealing with a far more traumatic situation than simply waiting

in detention for a visa. Set against that background I would like now

to come in my opening statement to deal with a particular case which I

think highlights some of the endemic problems that do exist.

So, I want to present

a case study in the assault of a 7 year-old child at Woomera with baton

and tear gas, the failure of all authorities to investigate adequately,

zealotry and dilatory behaviour of DIMIA concerned more with media management

and spin doctoring rather than care of children in detention and the institution

of the system to honour the dignity of a mother and child in detention.

So, I state categorically that in my opinion amounts to institutionalised

child abuse.

You'll see in what

I have set out before with the chronology of the events that occurred

on Good Friday night and into Holy Saturday morning. I happened to be

in Woomera that day in my capacity as a priest conducting a church service,

so I was rather happy I must say, that I was trapped there in detention

for some hours and was able to witness at first hand some of the events

that occurred.

I then returned on

the following Tuesday and learnt various things, including being told

by various people, including persons in authority, that unfortunately

had been hit by tear gas during that melee in Woomera. I then met with

a young woman, a single mother about whom I'll speak more later, who came

to me with her young child who was aged 7 and I was shown the bruises

to the child on the left leg and the lower right ankle which were quite

consistent with the mother and child's account, mainly that the child

had been hit with a baton.

As you'll be aware

and I'll table it with you, there was then, well, I then wrote at length

to the Minister the next day, who wouldn't, an Australian citizen observing

this sort of behaviour in contemporary Australia. The next day a medical

report was made at the ACM Medical Centre which notes, as I put in my

report to you:

Bruise of a few

days during duration on the medial aspect of the left knee and abrasion

and small bruise on the right shin.

Some days then passed,

in fact two weeks and it was only some days later that DIMIA had posted

on its web site after I'd made my first public comment about this issue

a couple of weeks after having provided the minister with all the relevant

information where DIMIA on its web site stated that:

Contrary to Father

Brennan's claims, the Department had no report of injuries to a 7 year-old

child.

And consistent with

DIMIA's approach on these matters, made much of the fact that there had

been injuries to 17 ACM officers. It then went on, I think fairly gratuitously,

to state:

If Father Brennan

has information or evidence of mis-treatment of detainees he should report

it to the appropriate authorities for investigation.

Under the Westminster

system one would have thought that the Minister was the appropriate authority.

I then sought correction of the government web site on 22 April, as you'll

see from the correspondence, particularly item 6, it took three days for

that matter then to be withdrawn from the web site. Unfortunately DIMIA

didn't withdraw the letter from publication of the Canberra Times, so

there was then a public exchange of letters between us in the Canberra

Times.

After my response

on 29 April, then for the first time, there was a pro-active response

by the Minister's Office, the Minister's Chief-of-Staff, as you see from

item 7 of the correspondence or point 10 in my chronology wrote saying

that the DIMIA officer was correct in asserting that:

There were no reported

injuries of detainee children at Woomera, you assert differently.

So, you will note

that there was something of a semantic discussion going on as to whether

or not there were injuries rather than reports of injuries though, of

course, it should be noted at this stage, back on 3 April, the ACM medical

officer had presumably already lodged the relevant documents. Then later

on that day, in fact at 9 pm, obviously there had been some further researches

going on after discussions between myself and the Minister's Office.

I was informed, as

you see there in point 11, that there was indeed a record of injuries

to a 11 year-old child. I didn't profess any expertise in being able to

identify whether the child was 7 or 11, the mother had told me he was

7 and he looked 7 to me and then, as you see, next day there was confirmation

that there were medical records which in fact related to a 7 year-old

child. Then having received the request to provide the name of the child

and the parent, I did that after getting the relevant permission from

the mother to provide that information.

I then saw it as

necessary to lodge a letter of complaint with Mr Farmer, the Secretary

of DIMIA on 6 May and it should be noted that though it only took 6 hours

for DIMIA in Canberra to post a public letter of response to me, namely,

that:

There was no information

or evidence available and if Father Brennan had relevant information,

he should provide it to the appropriate authorities.

Here we are 60 days

later and it's still not been possible to deal with that complaint. There

was a personal apology given me by the Minister for which I'm very grateful,

at our meeting on 3 June. I then went to Woomera last Wednesday and was

very troubled when I then met again with the mother of the child and we

spoke at some length and I told her about this Inquiry which was being

conducted and she was anxious that she would be able to make a statement

and so what I have with me is a letter which she has signed and the medical

report from ACM dated 3 April and also the calling card of the South Australian

police and I will duly table those but, if I may, I would simply like

to quote the relevant extracts of the letter at the moment:

My son was with

me in Oscar Compound during the disturbance in the early hours of Saturday,

30 March. He and I were both hit by tear gas even though we were not trying

to escape. I was blinded for about a minute and I took my son to my chest

and embraced him to protect me. I started to move away from the scene

with my son. Then an ACM guard came and bowed over me and struck my son

with a baton. On Tuesday, 2 April, I told my story to Fr Frank Brennan

and the lawyers at Woomera. I then went to the doctor on Wednesday, 3

April. The doctor made a report which I attach to this letter. I asked

the lawyers to make a complaint.

You will have also

noted that the Minister's Chief of Staff indicated in her correspondence

that a complaint was duly being lodged with the state authorities.

One and a half months

later two policemen came to see me. I told them what happened to my son.

They said they would return with an interpreter from Adelaide and with

Federal Police and someone from Childrens Services and with a camera for

interview with my son.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Two Federal policemen?

FR BRENNAN:

No, well, as I understood her, it was that they were two State policemen

and that they would be returning later with Federal police with Children's

Services. You'll note that she sometimes uses different terms for these

state authorities, but that's not surprising, she's in Woomera and English

of course is not her first language.

- and with a camera

for interview with my son. Then about one week later and before the United

Nations came to visit Woomera I was interviewed by a named policeman of

the South Australian Police about the incident. He said he was the boss

of the other police that would come. He said it was not the responsibility

of Federal Police because they would come only for damaged property. He

said Child Service would not come because their responsibility is child

abuse and relationships between children and parents. He gave me a card

with a reference number on it. He recorded our conversation.

He was interested

only in the events which occurred on the evening of Friday, 29 March.

He told me that the doctor and ACM had not made any report of my son's

injury to Children's Services. I asked him about my rights. He told me

you can't do anything because you are captive in here and when you get

out and get your visa you can continue your protest and maybe you can

get your rights. He asked whether I saw who hit my son. I said I did not

see because the guard was wearing a mask.

You'll appreciate

that night that all of the guards were wearing head to toe American style

riot gear.

He said we can't

catch him because you didn't see him. I said it's not important who hit

my son, just it's important that ACM action that they hit children because

it's their habit in our compound.

She then explains

that she was not available at Woomera when the UN or when HREOC came.

She said:

I trusted the government

to protect my son. I hope my complaint can help other mothers and children.

I'm only a single mother in detention who wants the government to care

for us.

So I table her letter

and the medical report and also the calling card from the South Australian

Police. The only response which I have received from government on this

is of course the Minister's letter to me of 3 June. It is a letter which

was undated but which was handed to me by the Minister at our most recent

meeting on 3 June and you'll note that the Minister at no stage in the

letter refers to this particular case but does make much of the fact that

there is a memorandum of understanding between state authorities and federal

authorities on these matters.

My observations by

way of concluding this opening statement would be that though it took

DIMIA less than six hours to publish a false refutation of the claims

of assault which had been formally communicated in writing to the Minister

two weeks before. After 60 days the Department has still not communicated

the results of its inquiry into the alleged breach of the APS Code of

Conduct by its Director of Public Affairs. The MOU with the state government

and the permanent working party of senior departmental officers have not

affected a satisfactory investigation of this instance of institutionalised

child abuse.

Given the change

to the case load at Woomera with most now being rejectees with nothing

to gain and nothing to lose and the despair inculcated in this remnant

group of detainees now less than 200, and you must appreciate of course

that Woomera is now a very different place from having had something like

1500 people there, many of whom now have been released on visas, now with

a remnant of a population many of whom are particularly the Iraqis and

Palestinians, are people who have been rejected and, for example, the

Palestinians now who have written letters four months in a row to the

Minister saying please get us out of Australia.

So you have to understand

how angry and upset they get in that detention when they hear public statements

by government saying these people are not refugees and they can go home

whenever they like. These Palestinians by way of aside would dearly love

to rejoin their wives and children on the Gaza Strip but they're not allowed

or able to do so and are simply held in detention without any form of

judicial review. So it does seem that in this sort of instance it's even

more necessary that the Department ensure adequate investigation of complaints

such as the administration of baton and tear gas to a seven year old child

and I would have thought that an apology be offered by the Department

and ACM for the needless, witting or unwitting, assault, obfuscation and

cover-up which have ensued.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much.

MS LESNIE:

Could I ask have you drawn this case to our attention because it's an

unusual situation or do you see it as an example of other things that

are going on in Woomera?

FR BRENNAN:

No. I mean I'm not saying that this is part of an ongoing pattern of behaviour.

I mean I've already attested to, I think, the good offices of the DIMIA

people at Woomera and I think many of the ACM people who work at Woomera

are very dedicated, particularly to this remnant population. As you'd

understand there's a certain bonding which has grown up between these

people who are now a remnant group and the staff who are there. Now all

of us who go there hear of course anecdotal evidence about abuses that

occur and whether or not there has been a ready investigation of those

matters. I'm not apprised of evidence about those matters. This is a particular

case which came to my attention which I have seen through fairly scrupulously

and I think the paper trail highlights what is a systematic problem of

fairly overwhelming proportions.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes, that's exactly what I wanted to ask you, how would you characterise

the systematic conclusions of that particular case and in the light of

your experience of six weekly visits over time?

FR BRENNAN:

Well, I think I can best explain that by my state of mind when I met with

the mother last Wednesday. I'd actually been overseas for the best part

of two months so there'd been some gap between my visits to Woomera on

this occasion. I had fully expected given as you in the Commission would

be aware DIMIA out of Canberra is fairly thorough in its dealing with

public relations on these sorts of issues that where a citizen, myself,

has come forward and said I have seen the bruises on the child and there

is a medical report by ACM which is consistent with it and there have

been reports by people in authority that sadly the wind was blowing the

wrong way on Good Friday night and yes it's very regrettable the children

were hit by tear gas. The thought that that sort of incident would have

occurred you would think that institutionally there would be a commitment

to investigate thoroughly to have the matter rectified and to make it

very clear that it was an isolated incident. Whereas I think if I may

say what we've seen is simply an elaborate exercise in spin doctoring.

DR OZDOWSKI: I

visited Woomera twice. I visited Woomera about a year ago and last time

about two weeks ago and I must say in comparison with what I saw last

year now the situation it's much more depressing, at least that's my judgment.

Would it coincide with your judgment that the situation was worse there?

FR BRENNAN:

Yes, and it must be self evidently so, sir, in that as I said before there

is a world of difference between a family being in detention in a place

like Woomera where they have an expectation or a hope that the day will

come where they're given a visa or where the overwhelming percentage of

the population there are in that situation, but now that is not the situation

with the overwhelming percentage of those who are now a remnant of a major

group who came and they know with no more boats coming basically they

are the left over of a policy which was instituted basically to be that

which is punitive and deterrent but where it is said that it is not that.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Going back to January this year there were also some riots and quite a

amount of lip sewing happening, were you visiting?

FR BRENNAN: Yes

I was. At that time you will recall there had been a significant delay

in the processing of Afghan claims and the minister, to give him credit,

at that time made it clear that there would be a prompt renewal of the

processing of Afghan claims and many of the people then were granted their

visas within that foreseeable future.

DR OZDOWSKI: There

were also allegations made partly, well there was also controversy which

was saying that the parents were assisting children to sew their lips.

Do you know of any evidence that the parents either assisted or encouraged

children in the lip sewing exercise?

FR BRENNAN:

No. The only thing I was ever told or ever heard was very insistent remarks

by parents and by what they call the delegates, that is, those who would

be representing the various ethnic groups in their dealings with ACM and

with DIMIA insisting that at no stage did parents either counsel or advise

or recommend or urge children to do so but that, rather, children of their

own accord wanted in solidarity to act with their parents.

DR OZDOWSKI: Coming

to Easter riots where you were a participant, could you describe what

happened and especially say how children were involved or unwilling with

participating in it and children, I mean up to 18 years old?

FR BRENNAN:

Yes, well, I emerged from the church service which was being held in a

donga, probably only about 30 or 40 feet from where the fence was then

being broken down. We were then ushered out to a space where those who

had attended the church were Christians and Sabean Mandaeans. There were

some of the Sabean Mandaeans then who were not able to return to their

compound and waited in dread and fear while ACM - see what you have in

these sorts of situations are if you like the goodies and the baddies

where you have, of course, the ACM riot gear in place but also you have

those who are ACM staff who are there to try and settle particularly mothers

and children.

Now, there were attempts

being made to return some of these people to their compound but that was

not possible because there was one man, who I understand to have been

a Sabean Mandaean, was very upset that these other Sabean Mandaeans had

actually joined the Christians on Good Friday and he truly was going berserk

and he was a man known to have a very violent disposition. I was then

sitting with a number of children as the water tank, the spray cannot

water truck, was backed up ready to deal with this man and then about

six of these men in riot gear went in to deal with him.

While that went on

there were two men bare chested who went to the top of a nearby donga,

stripped off above the waist and with razor blades were threatening to

do further injury to themselves. Now the trauma being caused to children

watching that sort of thing, all I can say is, it was traumatic enough

for me. I suspect that for some of the children it might not have been

quite as traumatic because they'd been exposed to so much of it. There

were then some children who started to play up and the ACM officers were

saying that basically they should stay there and not try and return to

any other compound.

I saw one child put

on a tantrum and start to attack - a very small child - started to attack

an ACM officer saying to the mother, the only way you get a visa is by

putting on that sort of performance. So it's a very unreal sort of world

and yes, that was the sort of window of opportunity that I had to see

something of the sort of mindset which at play.

DR OZDOWSKI: Did

you see women being restrained in a particular fashion?

FR BRENNAN:

No, because we'd been taken out of the compound where the breakout was

occurring and it was not possible to see actually there at that time.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did you see any action by officials to remove children from the area which

was threatened?

FR BRENNAN:

No, but I was unable to see that area, as I said. What you have to understand

about Woomera, of course, is that it is discrete compounds which are not

only isolated from each other but the visual capacity to see into the

compounds is very slight.

DR OZDOWSKI:

In your opinion, considering all your visits, is that system fixable?

FR BRENNAN:

No, well, everyone knows that Woomera is, I mean, it's a psychological

hell hole. There is now the new facility that's been opened. The so-called

IDAG, sometimes called the Independent Detention Advisory Group, the Immigration

Detention Advisory Group, has as I have understood, recommended since

January that Woomera be closed and every right thinking person who has

been to Woomera I think is of that view, myself included, but the minister

at this stage has not seen fit to indicate the appropriateness of the

closure of Woomera.

DR OZDOWSKI:

What I ask wasn't Woomera specifically but about the mandatory detention

system which was put in place in this country, whether it's fixable.

FR BRENNAN:

No, I don't think it's fixable. As the Minister well knows, I'm one of

those Australians who is implacably opposed to a detention principle but

given that it presently enjoys broad bipartisan support in our Parliament

I think that those of us who are the minority are well entitled, and that's

why I welcome an Inquiry of this sort, to say as I have said to the Minister,

we may well have a system of detention that everyone would agree that

it should be transparent, fair, it should not be capricious and it should

as far as possible respect the human rights and dignity of persons. I

think even those who support a detention policy, there are many of those

Australians who would be appalled at the thought that in 2002 a seven

year old kid can be hit by tear gas and baton and there can then be a

comprehensive cover up by Canberra.

DR OZDOWSKI:

The last question before I will ask my Assistant Commissioners to ask

you questions. Basically, what in your view is the reason for such a lengthy

detention? When I came to my job I think the average was about eight months;

that went down to about three and a half months, then it bubbled again

to eight, ten months, now possibly it's God knows how long. What are the

reasons for this?

FR BRENNAN: Well,

I think you have to look at it at each discrete phase. There have obviously

been delays in terms of processing primary decision making, particularly

with Afghans and that was understandable as we heard from RRT people there

before. Then the next phase from primary decision making phase to RRT

I would have thought that the very isolation of these places must be a

reason which has contributed to a further delay if these people were being

held in detention facilities such as Villawood or whatever, where there

would be far more access by RRT members.

I would have thought

that could be done more quickly and then, given the lottery nature of

that initial process particularly for Afghans and Iraqis, then of course

the desperate desire to try anything including Federal Court remedies

is there and what we now see, of course, is the delay is not because people

are waiting for anything to happen in terms of migration processes, it's

simply that in order to maintain a universal detention system the government

has to continue to play the bluff with the Australian public that those

who have been rejected, for example the Iraqis and Palestinians are being

held in detention for a legitimate migration purpose.

They are not being

held there for anything of the sort. They know their identity, they know

they are not a security risk, they know they are not a health risk, they

know where to find them, particularly if they've got little kids, they

could be released into the community tomorrow until it is safe for them

to return to Iraq or Palestine. Now, for the moment of course it is unthinkable

that we would return people to Iraq when we have a Government that says

that it will be party to any future war.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Could you let me know, do you know of any data indicating the risk of

absconding - of families seeking asylum in other developed democracies?

FR BRENNAN:

No, I don't, I'm sorry.

DR OZDOWSKI: You

don't know off-hand? Thank you. Professor Thomas?

PROF THOMAS: So,

with all of your knowledge do you have any suggestion for an alternative

solution to detention centres?

FR BRENNAN:

Yes - close them. But, given that that will not be happening, what is

essential is that, for example, if there be a credible complaint made

to the Minister for Immigration that a seven year old child has been hit

with tear-gas and a baton. Rather than have departmental officials engage

in some media campaign to try and discredit the credibility of the Australian

citizen who happened to have the misfortune of seeing the child, why not

get on with ensuring that there is a full and credible investigation.

And ensuring that something, even in writing, is given to the mother of

the child so as to be assured that, you may be being held in detention

but you are not completely deprived of your human rights in this sort

of situation.

PROF THOMAS:

Thank you.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Mrs Sullivan?

MRS SULLIVAN:

You said a couple of times that "that won't happen". That there

won't be in fact a major sea-change in the approach that is taken. Is

there any way to break the impasse that you can see? Given that it has

been created.

FR BRENNAN: Well,

I think we are now moving beyond the purpose of our Inquiry today. But

it does seem to me that, yes, the obligation which is cast upon citizens

such as myself who disagree with the policy - which basically enjoys bi-partisan

support in our Parliament - is that we have to come up with something

which is seen to be more workable and more decent.

Now, the problem

is that the mind-set which has developed in Australia is because, ironically,

it is such a small problem. Namely, 1 to 4000 people a year turning up

by boat because we are an island continent - that it is such a small nut

that we can design a sledge-hammer to crack it.

We are not in the

situation that you would be in Europe of having tens of thousands of asylum

seekers. Where, of course, it would be unthinkable to be putting so many

children in detention. And of course in third-world countries it is absolutely

inconceivable that precious resources would be spent on putting children

in detention. And so what we are left with is I think the unique Australian

situation where we pride ourselves that we've designed a system which

works because now no-one else is coming, but we are left with this remnant

and we continue to pride ourselves that it's decent. I defy anyone to

go to a place like Woomera and to meet these mothers and children in these

situations and think it is decent.

MRS SULLIVAN:

Thank you.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Just one last question. We spoke, not that long ago, to all parents and

children in Woomera and also in other detention centres. We didn't speak

to the mother of the seven year old child which was bashed over there.

Could you perhaps let me know, did the mother mention why she couldn't

see us, or what has happened?

FR BRENNAN:

Yes, she was in hospital.

DR OZDOWSKI: She

was in hospital on that day. Well, Father Brennan, thank you very much.

FR BRENNAN: In

hospital suffering as the result it might be said of the trauma which

in part had resulted from this incident.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Well, Father Brennan, thank you very much for your submission and thank

you for your appearance. I would like to ask Dr Eileen Pittaway to come

forward. Yes, welcome to the hearings. I would like to ask you to take

an oath or affirmation.

EILEEN PITTAWAY,

affirmed [3.26]

DIRECTOR OF THE CENTRE FOR REFUGEE RESEARCH, UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES

and BOARD MEMBER OF THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON REFUGEE WOMEN

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you. Could I ask you to state your name, address, qualifications

and the capacity in which you are appearing at the hearing?

DR PITTAWAY: My

name is Eileen Pittaway. I reside in [address removed]. My qualification

is PhD in Social Policy Refugee Studies. I am the Director of the Centre

for Refugee Research at the University of New South Wales and Board Member

of the Australian National Committee on Refugee Women, and those two bodies

have jointly submitted to this Inquiry.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you very much. Just to remind you that I made a number of orders

in respect of privacy of individuals. In particular I would like to ask

you not to identify asylum seekers either by name or in any other way.

Similarly, please do not identify third parties and that includes employees

of ACM and DIMIA. Now, could I ask you to make an opening statement and

in particular I would like to ask you to say a few words about the nature

of your experience with children in detention or children who left detention

centres? And I would like you to tell the Inquiry how much direct knowledge

do you have of the situation.

DR PITTAWAY:

Thank you. The submission that we have made is based on the work that

both ANCORW and the Centre for Refugee Research has done with children

who have been in detention but we have not worked directly in detention

centres. So, our experience is with children who have been in detention

and are now in the community.

Most of our work

is research work, we are a research centre. We became particularly concerned

when we were doing research into the mental health sequela for children

- refugee children who had suffered from torture and trauma. Or, worse,

members of families who had suffered severe torture and trauma prior to

resettlement in Australia. This was done at the request of the mothers

of the children. We'd been working for a long while with mothers when

they asked, in particular, could we focus on the children who were experiencing

a lot of problems in the community.

We decided that we

would look at the experience of children through the people who have the

prime contact with them. Mainly school-teachers, school counsellors, local

community centre workers and doctors. In doing that research which was

in refugee children in general, one of the unexpected findings of the

research was th comment made by just about every professional we spoke

to, that it was their opinion that the children who had been in detention

were having many more problems in resettlement in Australia than other

refugee children who came direct.

So, I think what

we are doing is trying to respond to points (4) and (6) in the terms of

reference of the Inquiry. The impact of detention on the well-being and

healthy development of children, and additional methods and safeguards

which may be required to protect the rights and best interests of child

asylum seekers and refugees residing in the community after a period of

detention. The research we did certainly did suggest that the children

who had been in detention had grave problems in resettlement and there

was a time lag in this.

I must say at this

stage that we were not funded to do this research and have so far failed

to raise the funding to do the research we think must be done into this

area. It was one of those circumstances where in interviewing some hundred

professionals working with refugee children some 70 per cent of them made

comments about the children who they knew had been in detention. So it

became, as often in research, one of those secondary findings that was

unexpected. We also work extensively with refugee women, refugee families

through the networks of the Australian National Committee on Refugee Women.

I'll just give two

examples, perhaps, about the sorts of things that we are concerned about.

General reports back from teachers and school counsellors is that refugee

children who have been in detention much more tend to be exemplary students

for the first year after release from detention. At that stage it is sort

of supports the notion of resilience. The refugee children - you know

children are like rubber-balls - they bounce back whatever we dish out

to them and they'll be all right. But after about a year and often on

an inverse ratio to the settlement of the parent the children in detention

started exhibiting quite severe behaviours - dysfunctional behaviours.

It was also noted that when they started to play the play was often play

modelling violence, modelling conflict and that they found it very difficult

to make relationships with other children in the playground. This is of

course of great concern to us.

One of the other

findings from that research which alerted us to the problems was that

while we as researchers could identify a list of sequela of this. We could

identify a list of indicators, benchmarks. We could write books for teachers

and counsellors which we did saying, if you see these behaviours these

are the sorts of things you might need to do. You need to refer the children

on. When it came to making listings of the places where we could refer

the children for assistance in the community there was virtually nothing.

The services that are available are excellent but are so over-stretched

that the children are not able to access them. And I think this is a violation

of their basic human rights.

A classic example

is one family we had who had been in detention - it was a woman with five

daughters. They had watched - been forced to watch at gun-point in their

country of origin the father and brother shot. They had all been raped,

including the seven and eight year and 18 months later we still couldn't

get them any counselling assistance and the whole family was suffering

from the affects of their experience. Plus the experience of having been

in detention in Australia prior to being released into the community,

it doesn't take an Einstein I think to realise the long term effects that

it is going to have on children. We are currently working with a family

with three children, one of the girls is 17, they are out of detention,

they were in Woomera for nearly two years. On the way over, their journey

was horrendous, they escaped from Afghanistan, they lived in a hell camp

in Pakistan, both of the teenage girls were raped in the camp.

They escaped using

a people smuggler and in great danger, they landed in Indonesia. They

came over in a leaky boat, the mother who was five months pregnant had

a miscarriage on the boat and the children had to help her dispose of

the foetus overboard. They came to Australia and were put into detention

and they tell us how all the time the children said to the father, father

why are you doing this to us, why are you making us come, why are you

bringing us to this camp, why are you putting us on this boat and the

whole time the father said because Australia is a good country, Australia

is the country where we will be cared for, Australia is the country of

human rights.

They were put in

Woomera where they - again we know what the sorts of experiences happened,

they were forced to see suicide attempts, they were in riots. The mother

has not spoken since she's been in Australia. They have not been out of

detention for a year and have been informed by an official, and I don't

know who the official is, that they are having to prepare to go back to

Afghanistan.

The girl who is the

main spokesperson for the family who is 17 and is doing extremely well

considering everything, at school and wants to continue, has been told

by her father, if they are going to force us to go back then you have

to leave school with your brothers and sisters and work because we've

got no money, everything is destroyed when we go back you'll need work.

The mother has not

only not spoken since she lost the child but has apparently not stopped

crying since they've been told they've got to go back, so that 17 year

old girl is carrying the family and trying to study and we do not have

services in the community to help those people. The services we have are

so overstretched and so inadequate that I think the whole range of human

rights have been violated for those families and many other like them.

MR OZDOWSKI:

There are two issues I would like to ask you and then I will ask Professor

Thomas to ask questions about mental health. Your submission stated that

when you sought information from employees and asylum seekers, they were

unwilling to be identified. Could you tell me what was the reason why

they were not willing to be identified?

MS PITTAWAY:

They said that they thought that they would be deported immediately.

MR OZDOWSKI:

So they were fearing the Department of Immigration punishing them for

going public on the issues?

MS PITTAWAY:

Yes. There is in particular one case where the mother informed us that

her three teenage sons had been padlocked to a bed, in two beds in solitary

confinement for giving cheek to guards in detention. She had

MR OZDOWSKI: I

don't understand, could you

MS PITTAWAY:

The guards in the detention centre

MR OZDOWSKI:

It happened in the detention centre?

MS PITTAWAY:

Yes - had claimed that the boys had been very cheeky to them and therefore

they handcuffed them to beds.

MR OZDOWSKI:

For three days?

MS PITTAWAY:

For three days.

MR OZDOWSKI: In

which detention centre did it happen?

MS PITTAWAY:

In Woomera.

MR OZDOWSKI:

In Woomera.

MS PITTAWAY:

Now we tried - we asked, we told them the only way we could do anything

about this was to get her to make a statement. It wasn't just our organisation,

there are a number of people who know about this case, she absolutely

refused, she said no, I am out now, I am at least safe in the community

for a while, if I say anything against the department, it was her belief

that she would be deported and be punished.

We have other cases

who have said the same, I guess as research is one of our biggest frustrations

is trying to verify massive anecdotal evidence. We have people who have

come out of detention and the fact that we are not allowed in. It is so

difficult to get permission to do proper research in detention so we have

all of this evidence that we cannot verify in any way that would satisfy

either the academic or the bureaucratic community that what we are saying

is valid.

MR OZDOWSKI: The

second question I've got is that DIMIA submission claims that Woomera

alternative detention project is a success. You disagree with this?

MS PITTAWAY:

Absolutely.

MR OZDOWSKI: Could

you give us the reasons why?

MS PITTAWAY: I

think that it was supposed to be based on the Swedish model and whereby

the women and children were released into the community, welcoming community

in an urban centre with their own community nearby, whereas the women

and children at Woomera were released into what some have described as

a hostile environment. The conditions were perhaps better than the detention

centre but in other ways very restrictive and a lot of the local people

were also hostile being detained.

MR OZDOWSKI:

How do you know about it?

MS PITTAWAY: Again

it is anecdotal evidence from people who have come through from there

and who have worked there in the community.

MR OZDOWSKI:

Thank you. Professor Thomas?

PROF THOMAS:

You talk about people that in your case, like the family with the two

girls who have no help, have you contacted the service of treatment and

rehabilitation of torture and trauma survivors?

MS PITTAWAY:

Yes. They are an excellent service but they are overworked.

PROF THOMAS:

It looked like the case that you just mentioned - that it the very kind

of case that should have priority.

MS PITTAWAY:

Yes but one of the problems there is that as new waves of people arrive,

we don't have enough interpreters available for the services to be given.

So it is not just a case of providing the medical service, it is a case

of also ensuring that we have the trained interpreters ready at any given

time to be able to interpret at the level needed to do the sort of counselling

that would have been necessary for those families. They are the sorts

of resource issues that get in the way the whole time.

PROF THOMAS:

In your submission you talk about the principle that the children had

inbuilt resilience so what is your view about that now?

MS PITTAWAY:

I think that children are resilient if they are given the proper supports

so to say children are not resilient would be to say that once they'd

been through these experiences they would never recover. I think research

dating right back to the time of the Holocaust, indicates that if children

are given the proper supports in the community and if their parents were

given the proper supports because so often the traumatised children have

traumatised parents, so that the normal supports for a child who has problems

are not there.

If their supports

are built in, intensively, and it seems to be not. Long term research

indicates that if it is intensively done, for instances in the first year

of need then resilience comes into play and in particular children recover.

If that support is not there then the children's resilience is not, it

doesn't do anything for them.

PROF THOMAS:

So what would be your hypothesis about the long term effect on these children

who have just been released now from detention centres?

MS PITTAWAY:

It is my hypothesis that if we don't acknowledge first of all prior to

arrival in Australia, the majority of them live through certainly traumatic

experiences, many of them witness torture and many of the older children

were raped or sexually abused, I think we have to acknowledge those facts

and that the detention experience exacerbates that trauma, adds to it,

often just by being there adds to that trauma but children who have been

through horrendous experiences need supportive families and the very structure

of detention takes away family support possibilities, parents are not

allowed to parent naturally or normally in detention.

So you are taking

away all of the structures that would at normal times keep families together.

We are talking about the children who have been traumatised. If those

children come out into the community where they are going to meet racism,

problems at school because of language, and still the same problems of

trauma, if those issues are not addressed, I think those children have

a very poor chance of growing and resettling or staying whole enough here

to be resettle back after the termination of their TBP than if we put

in some support services. If we want these children to go up and be resilient

we have to put in support services and I think that is a human right which

they deserve.

PROF THOMAS:

But say we have all the support services, what can we do about the public

opinion, the racism, the hostility in the community that you mention?

MS PITTAWAY:

I think that's a matter of public education and while the Premiers Department

from New South Wales has just made available to our centre funding to

do education kits for primary and secondary schools to help combat this

racism and opinion. I think they are the only sorts of things at the moment

that we can do.

PROF THOMAS:

Do you apply for Living in Harmony projects?

MS PITTAWAY:

Yes.

PROF THOMAS: So

what did you have as a suggestion for an alternative? What kind of recommendation

can we make to have a reasonable chance of success?

MS PITTAWAY:

That's a difficult one. Our position is very much that we think that there

should not be detention of families, full stop. We do not believe that

women and children should be separated from fathers or other family members.

I think again there is sufficient research going right back to the holocaust

that that is detrimental to families and to children's future development.

I personally do not see a good way of detaining families in closed detention

especially isolated from their own communities. We would strongly recommend

systems such as are implemented in Sweden where there is very much community

surveillance of families in detention and some very minimal form of detention

as people arrive. But in terms of improvements in detention we just don't

see it as a possibility, thank you.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Any concluding statement?

MS PITTAWAY:

No.

DR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you very much for your evidence and submission and good luck with your

research.

SHORT BREAK [3.42pm]

RESUMES [4.10pm]

DR OZDOWSKI:

So we are starting the late afternoon session and I would like to welcome

Dr John Pace to come forward to give evidence. Could I ask you to make

an oath or affirmation.

JOHN PACE, AFFIRMED

[4.12pm]

DIRECTOR, AUSTRALIAN HUMAN RIGHTS CENTRE AND DELEGATE OF AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

ON A MISSION TO NAURU

DR OZDOWSKI: Could

I ask you to state your name, address, qualification and capacity in which

you are appearing for the record?

MR J. PACE: My

name is, John Pace. I live at number [address removed]. I am here in my

capacity as director of the Australian Human Rights Centre and as delegate

of Amnesty International on a mission to Nauru in November 2001.

DR OZDOWSKI:

I made a number of orders to protect the privacy of individuals and to

protect children in particular if you like. So I would like to ask you

not to identify any asylum seekers in your submission and also I would

like to ask you that the identity of third parties is not disclosed and

this includes also current or former employees at detention centres. Mr

Pace, could I ask you now to make an introductory statement.

MR PACE: Thank

you very much, Mr Commissioner, I would like to inform the Commission

that in November 2001 on the request of Amnesty International I conducted

a mission to the island of Nauru to observe the conditions of detention

of the asylum seekers that had been transported there on two shipments.

The first shipment being those who arrived on the Australian Naval Vessel,

the "Manora" and a second shipment being transported to Nauru

by the Australian Navy Vessel, the "Tobruk".

I remained in Nauru

for one week and in the course of my mission I had the opportunity of

being received by the chief secretary of the Government of the Republic

of Nauru as well as the head of the office of the International Organisation

for Migration and his deputy who was in charge of the refugee camps. In

the course of my mission I conducted interviews with the interviewing

teams from the UNHCR and from DIMIA and had occasion to access and speak

freely with the asylum seekers every day of my visit.

As a result of my

visit I drew up a report and I sent it to Amnesty in London. Accompanying

my report were a number of attachments including the official agreements

and documents signed by Australia and the Republic of Nauru as well as

the exchange of notes which were both entered into by the Republic of

Nauru and the IOM and the Republic of Nauru and the UNHCR as well as other

related agreements such as the tripartite agreement between the Australian

Protection Services, the Nauru Police Force and the IOM.

In addition to the

written report that I made to Amnesty and the attachments thereto, I received

from the asylum seekers written statements in their own language. Namely,

Arabic and Dari, in which they described to me the conditions, their experiences

of their shipment from the vessel in which they had arrived in the waters

or in the territory of Australia, between that transition and the arrival

on Nauru.

These documents have

also been submitted to Amnesty International and translations have been

made. They have not been made public as far as I am aware, Mr Commissioner.

More recently I was invited by Amnesty International to appear at a Senate

hearing on "a certain maritime incident." On that occasion I

took the opportunity of indicating the existence of the statements which

described the conditions of the shipment of these people as seen by them.

Which include of course references to children and treatment of children.

As on that occasion

and their admissability I suppose will have to be determined by this Commission,

especially in the light of what the directives you have issued. But in

this context I think it would be appropriate to cite the statement of

the Senate Committee in the context of this indication that I had given

them on 1 May 2002. The chairman essentially suggested that I do not proceed

with the submission of the statements because - and here I read page CMI1462

of the Hansard. He says to me that:

It is a possible

contempt of the Senate if a witness would be damaged in any way by someone

because of evidence they gave before a Senate Committee. That is put on

the record daily. But these people are beyond our jurisdiction, and we

therefore have no power to do that. What has caused us to pause is that

DIMIA will not guarantee that if things are adduced in these proceedings,

from people who are offshore outside our jurisdiction, they will not take

them into consideration. In those circumstances, we are on a warning that

these things may be taken into consideration and it is just a question

of balancing that.

The result or the

upshot of this was that I then of course in the interest of protecting

the asylum seekers desisted from handing the statements. These statements

make up about 69 pages in the original languages. They complete my report

to Amnesty International. I could stop here by way of opening.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Maybe for the moment just to let you know I requested the Department of

Immigration to facilitate a visit of this inquiry to both Nauru and Mannus

and I am awaiting the response. Also part of my concern is that the Commission

very rarely receives any communications from either Nauru or Mannus. We

certainly would welcome more information about what is happening over

there. So perhaps if I could ask you to use the remaining time to focus

on children in Nauru conditions there and advise this inquiry what is

happening over there.

MR PACE: Thank

you very much, Commissioner. When I was there there were 129 children

out of the 795 asylum seekers in the two camps. They ranged in age from

a few weeks old to

DR OZDOWSKI:

Some born over there?

MR PACE: Some

born over there. One I saw was newly born and there was a lady apparently

who was in labour at that time. There was also they ranged up to the age

of 16,17. Among them there were in one camp alone, eight unaccompanied

minors who I met personally and who explained to me how they got there

and why they were there. But the overall observation I made in regard

to the treatment of the asylum seekers which is in regard to the sense

of hopelessness and sense of severe psychological pressure I would say,

even then, attested to me by the many of the interviewers themselves was

the fact that in the case of children in particular there was problems

of education, problems of health.

When I was there

there was one public health doctor with two nurses for the 795 people.

I understand since then, because there has been some exchanges between

some of them and myself through other contacts in the meantime, that more

doctors have been brought in. But when I was there there was one doctor

for 795 - a general health, public health medical person. Also, the asylum

seekers themselves, in particular the Iraqi's, you see, the Afghani's

from the Manora shipment were only males because the family groups had

been diverted to New Zealand. So the bulk of the Afghani's were single,

except for a group of - a smaller group than the Iraqi's, but quite tough,

I must say, young couples with small children who came via the Tobruk.

Tough in the sense of brave, if I may. The Iraquis were trying to improvise

some kind of classroom and when I was there, in fact, the IOM colleagues

were looking for a carpenter to make benches so that they could sit in

a classroom.

DR OZDOWSKI: So

there is no school there?

MR PACE: Well,

there is a school in Nauru, but there is not a school in the camp. There

was no school in the camp.

DR OZDOWSKI: Can

children from the camp attend the school

MR PACE: When

I was there that was expressly forbidden, and that was not really - among

the interviews I made it was clearly stated to me by Nauruan officials

that this was considered a great shame because apparently the Nauru primary

and kindergarten facilities were good, modern, comparatively modern and

roomy and some Nauruans, anyway, that I talked to in the government and

the civilian area would have welcomed a little bus load to come down to

the town to share education.

DR OZDOWSKI:

So who prohibited that access to education?

MR PACE: Well,

you see, the IOM regime running the camp, who I must say for the record

are very high professionals of the best quality, but simply totally inexperienced

about running a camp. It was clear to me that they had absolutely

DR OZDOWSKI:

So they are highly professional in a different area?

MR PACE: That's

right. They are very professional, I am sure, in processing migration

requests, for instance, and resettlement requests, and I'm sure in perhaps

arranging for shipment of planes of refugees from one side of the planet

to the other. But they were clearly inexpert - very well-meaning, but

totally inadequate for the task that they were given of running two camps

of those size. Indeed, among the Iraqi's asylum seekers there was one

or two middle aged ladies who had teaching experience and they were the

ones who were volunteering to get the children together in a corner of

the camp. You see, the camp had no facilities other than residence, as

it were, if you can call it that.

Even though there

were - on the map you would see something called the library and clinic

and things like that, and when you go there you see a khaki tent which

is empty and a rotten table with nothing on it. So there were no infrastructure

at all at that time. The younger people were trying to arrange volleyball

games with some of the locals, so every two weeks they would try to arrange

for a group of local kids to come up to play volleyball with the

DR OZDOWSKI:

So there was free movement? Those people could move between the camp and

the rest?

MR PACE: You

could not - they could not leave the camp. You could not leave the camp.

You couldn't enter the camp without giving your name to the Chubb security

person at the gate. You could not bring gifts to these people. What some

Nauruan well-wishers were doing were hanging - I saw them myself - hanging

clothes on the fence during the night, so in the morning they could fish

them out and use them, because many of them - a whole shipload of them

had no clothes at all. They were trans-shipped because their boat was

sinking, or had sunk, so they were forced to jettison their belongings.

Well, without wishing

to sound strident or dramatic about it, but the situation of the children

in particular that I saw myself in Nauru at that time was to my mind very

serious. Physically

DR OZDOWSKI:

Did you see any of the Australian detention centres?

MR PACE: No,

I did not.

DR OZDOWSKI:

No?

MR PACE: No,

it was suggested to me when I came back here that I should perhaps. But,

quite honestly, Commissioner, I think that I have a pretty good idea of

what I don't want to be in myself, and certainly that's not Nauru. Nauru

is a - I feel it is hellish, honestly. It is difficult to describe, you

know, perhaps you may wish to - if you were privileged to go there now

perhaps you will see a much better set up, but that's difficult because

it's an island which you can ride around in 12 minutes and it's four and

a half hours away from Brisbane by plane. It's in the middle of nowhere.

There's no beaches. No vegetation, as such, except some dying palm trees.

On the other hand, this lunar landscape which is the most depressing thing

you can think of. There's nothing to do. There's no telephones, really,

or no - they have since got a satellite phone, two phones. They now, since

after I left, they share - now that there are 11 hundred-something of

them on Nauru.

But my concern for

the children in Nauru is particularly provoked, as it were, by the fact

that Nauru is a State party to the Child Convention. It's the only convention

that Nauru has ratified. Therefore, I would have expected Nauru to be

more sensitive to its obligations in regard to children than it is to

the other obligations. It has signed the ICCPR. Actually it signed when

I was there, and I wish I could claim credit for that, but it was a wonderful

coincidence. A wonderful coincidence. I was very happy afterwards when

I read that on the internet. But the child problem in regard to the international

obligations of Nauru are extremely serious, particularly given the fact

that these children are going through what they are.

When we prepared,

for the Australian Human Rights Centre, our submission to the Working

Group on Arbitrary Detention a few weeks ago, we had the opportunity of

indicating these aspects and should the Commission so wish we would be

more than happy to make available a copy of that version.

DR OZDOWSKI:

Yes, I would like to ask you to take that request on notice, if possible.

We would like to have these materials and if there is a need to keep the

whole material or parts of the material relating to names on a confidential

basis we would agree to do so.

MR PACE: Thank

you very much, indeed, sir. Commissioner, with regard to the statements

made to me in writing which have not yet seen the light of day, I understand

that Amnesty International is testifying before you, these are documents

that belong to Amnesty and I believe that they should form part of your

dossier because they are relevant to your mandate and, they are very relevant,

I would say, to your mandate.

DR OZDOWSKI:

The Amnesty already has testified so we will have to get in touch with

them.

MR PACE: Yes,

please, because, yes.

MR OZDOWSKI:

We will unfortunately have to finish now, would you like to make a concluding

statement?

MS LESNIE:

May ask one quick question?

MR OZDOWSKI:

Yes, one quick question.

MS LESNIE:

Well the question is quick I am not sure about the answer.

MR PACE: I

will do my best.

MS LESNIE:

I was wondering whether you got an impression when you were in Nauru who

was controlling what was going on there, was it IOM, was it UNHCR, was

it CHUBB, was it Eurest, was it DIMIA, who guiding, what was going on

inside the camp there?

MR PACE: Who

was top dog? In the management sense of providing the facilities, logistics,

it is IOM. The final word say in the top dog sense my feeling is that

it was Australia.

MS LESNIE:

Who was it that said the gates shall be closed, that the people inside

the camp can't leave when they want to?

MR PACE: IOM.

IOM you see they have one or two meetings every week I think one or two

every week on Tuesdays and Thursdays among them to run these camps and

they discuss these aspects so even though you do not see the Australian

presence manifest physically, it is quite clear - first of all it is not

Nauru, let's exclude that even though the answer you will get is that

it is Nauru's problem.

Nauru has made it

very clear to me in writing and orally that it is only doing this because

Australia is paying it to do so. Secondly, it is not IOM because IOM -

again had they had any experience about running camps - the last thing

they would do would wish to create an incarceration atmosphere on an island

like that. UNHCR wouldn't have done it that way for sure. UNHCR was only

there because they had very little option having because of the antecedents.

So at least by elimination

I would say that and that it is certainly Australia that is running the

show and other than by elimination I would think that the fact that Australian

money and Australian under infrastructure is being put in, there was being

put in daily there in boatloads next to me doesn't give the slightest

doubt that it is Australia that is running the show there.

MS LESNIE:

Thank you.

MR OZDOWSKI: Thank

you very much. We may be in touch with you at a later date to ask for

some further information but thank you very much

MR PACE: Thank

you Commissioner.

MR OZDOWSKI:

for your submission and thank you for availing yourself. Thank you very

much.

MR OZDOWSKI:

Now the next hearing it will be a hearing in camera so I will have to

ask everyone to leave the room.

SHORT BREAK [4.34pm]

CONTINUING IN

TRANSCRIPT-IN-CONFIDENCE

 

Last

Updated 9 January 2003.