Site navigation

Change font size: SmallerLargerReload

Human Rights navigation


Click here to return to the Submission Index

Submission to the National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention from

the Equal Opportunity Commission of Victoria

Overview

Overview of legal status and entitlements of child refugees with temporary protection visas (TPV)

The duty of non-discrimination under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC)

Children's language and culture rights

Children's language rights

Right to special consideration based on children's needs

Right to education

The right to a safe educational environment

Right to higher education

Right to employment

Discrimination by employers

Summary

Right to material and other assistance

Conclusion

Overview

The Equal Opportunity Commission of Victoria (the Commission) commends the enquiry by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission into the circumstances of children in immigration detention and the longer-term effects of detention on children who have entered the Australian community. This submission considers the post-detention experience and treatment of children and young adults released into the community as recognised refugees, with particular reference to,

Ø the status and rights of children who have entered the community following a period of immigration detention to maintain links with a previous culture and language; and to participate in the areas essential to children's development such as education and employment;

Ø whether the post-detention treatment of children complies with the duty of non-discrimination under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC) and reflected in Australian human rights legislation.

In preparation for this submission, the Commission consulted with a range of people involved in the care and support of children and young adults who have entered the Victorian community following a period of immigration detention, including parents, a teacher, and community and volunteer workers. The Commission also consults on an on-going basis with communities in which there is a strong representation of refugees, notably, Arabic-speaking communities [1] in Victoria.

Overview of legal status and entitlements of child refugees with temporary protection visas (TPV)

Children entering the Australian community as a result of their (or their parents') application for refugee status through the on-shore humanitarian program are entitled to similar benefits available to adult TPV holders, subject to the following,

Subject to these exceptions, children in the community issued with a TPV are subject to the same restrictions imposed on adult TPV holders, including ineligibility for family reunion rights; intensive English classes; Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS); and the refugee settlement programs provided to children holding permanent protection visas (PPV).

It is noted that subsequent to a period of immigration detention, child refugees who are identified at being at risk in the community may be eligible for services in addition to the limited services provided by the Commonwealth to holders of a TPV. These services are predominantly provided by local and state government agencies, community and volunteer organisations and members of the children's ethnic communities. It is also noted that some of these services receive partial Commonwealth financial assistance. This submission does not seek to address the adequacy or otherwise of these services or the arrangements relating to their funding, but instead focuses on the services that are formally provided to child refugees in the community through Australia's humanitarian program and in particular those services provided to children who become refugees through the off-shore humanitarian program.

The duty of non-discrimination under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC)

Freedom from discrimination is an unequivocal right protected under the CROC. This right is given expression in Article 2:

"1. States parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability or other status.

2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members."

This right is also protected under the Convention on the Status of Refugees (Article 3) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, Article 2.1). Insofar as this right is applicable to children, the right to freedom from discrimination should be distinguished from 'second-tier' rights, such as the right to state-sponsored childcare and education that are contingent on states' progressive capacity to provide these services. That is, states who have agreed to ratify these instruments may not depart from their obligation to refrain from discrimination against children based on issues related to the state's rate of economic development or other internal or administrative matters.

The Commission has argued in other forums that the right to freedom from discrimination is one that should be advanced concomitantly with other rights; that it is not a right that can be suspended in the purported exercise of other rights .[3]

The equal enjoyment by children of the rights encapsulated in the CROC, in the Commission's submission, requires states to acknowledge the diverse needs of children and to respond to specific instances of disadvantage by providing increased assistance and support to children as is appropriate to their identified needs. This approach accords with the widely recognised principle of substantive equality stipulated by Tanaka J of the International Court of Justice in the South West Africa Case (Second Phase) [1966] ICJ Rep 6 at 304-05:

"The principle of equality before the law does not mean the absolute equality, namely the equal treatment of men without regard to individual, concrete circumstances, but it means the relative equality, namely the principle to treat equally whare are equal and unequally what are unequal…To treat unequal matters differently according to their inequality is not only permitted but required."

The provision of substantive equality to marginalised and disadvantaged children is also inherent in the notion of the best interests of the child, a principle that underpins the CROC (Article 3.1) and much domestic Australian law.

Children's language and culture rights

Children displaced from their country of birth, or born in a country other than that of their parents', receive particular recognition in the CROC. Significantly, the CROC recognises the right of children displaced from their country of birth, and members of minority communities in another state, to maintain culture and language appropriate to the child's background and needs. To this effect, Article 29(1) of the CROC states,

"State parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to…(c) The development of respect for the child's parents, his or her own cultural identity, language and values, for the national values of the country in which the child is living, the country from which he of she may originate, and for civilizations different from his or her own".

Children entering the community following (an often long) period of detention and, before that, transit through other countries of asylum, are under Article 29(1) entitled to assistance to gain knowledge of and familiarity with Australian society and to re-establish links with the culture, language and traditions of the community from which children have been forcibly displaced. This right is particularly important for unaccompanied children who may have had little or no contact with members of their immediate family and community throughout the duration of their asylum. Children who are denied the appropriate assistance after their release into the Australian community may have exacerbated feelings of isolation and marginalisation, which has consequences for the child's ability to establish lasting relationships in the community with peers from the child's ethnic community and with the broader community. These values are concomitant with the goals identified by those who specialise in the treatment of children and adults who have endured situations of conflict, torture, and trauma. These goals have particular relevance to children. They are,

Whilst children who enter the community through the on-shore humanitarian program are entitled to counselling to overcome the worse effects of their asylum experience, it is submitted that children within this group, through their limited or complete lack of access to particular services, are denied an appropriate environment and assistance to familiarise themselves with the mainstream Australian community and to re-establish links with their original culture and language. This in turn undermines the ability of children to achieve the more challenging recovery goals mentioned above.

It is widely acknowledged that children recovering from upheaval and traumatic events can benefit from stability, in home, in relationships and routine [5]. In the Commission's submission, children released from detention and settled in the Australian community are essentially denied a stable environment conducive to recovery and integration into the community. In particular, this group is denied the range of settlement support services provided by the Commonwealth to refugees entering the community through the off-shore humanitarian program such as short-term housing, provision of basic needs such as furniture, clothing and food, and assistance accessing benefits and programs such as intensive English instruction (each of these is discussed in more detail below). These services are not provided to children recently introduced to the Australian community except through the charity of state government agencies, community and church organisations and volunteers who at any one time may have insufficient resources to comprehensively provide for the needs of child refugees, and, if accompanied, their families. In this environment, child refugees and their families are treated as emergency clients and a prioritised accordingly with other vulnerable members of the community in need of assistance. The ability of these organisations to organise and coordinate efforts to assist recent refugee arrivals is frustrated by the short notice provided to them by the Commonwealth before their release from detention [6]. Children not provided with a stable environment upon release in the community are at greater risk of homelessness, contact with the criminal justice system and psychological problems [7].

Children's language rights

Community workers with children from refugee backgrounds have reported to the Commission that children with limited English are likely to experience greater difficulty establishing links in the community, adapting to social customs and learning and finding employment than their peers. In turn this makes them vulnerable to far greater levels of racism and intolerance. It is also observed that children's proficiency in English is largely dependent on the individual circumstances of the child in their country of origin and the events and degree of upheaval since displacement from their country of origin. Accordingly, children entering the Australian community through the humanitarian program have vastly different language tuition needs and this is recognised through the provision of English classes, including intensive language instruction, to children who enter the community through the offshore humanitarian program. This recognition can be contrasted to the position of child TPV holders who are denied Commonwealth funded English tuition, irrespective of the language needs of this group. Effectively, then, children reaching Australia through the off-shore program and with relatively advanced English proficiency may receive up to 510 hours of Commonwealth funded English tuition whilst those arriving through the on-shore program and who may have relatively limited English skills receive little or no language tuition except in cases where this is provided by community organisations or volunteers.

Under Article 29 of the CROC children have a distinguishable right to maintain their connections with traditional culture and language. This a significant right not only for children re-establishing links with minority communities in Australia but also for children who through enforced separation have had little of no contact with members of their own culture for extended periods. The right of child TPV holders to maintain their previous language and cultural traditions does not appear to be protected by the Commonwealth in any formal way. This only appears to occur through the ad hoc services provided by community services and volunteers. For example, provision of ethnic language tuition is usually carried out by volunteers during after-school programs. A teacher of Arabic informed the Commission that the comparative inexperience of teachers of Arabic in his experience had reduced students' enthusiasm to maintain their learning of Arabic.

Right to special consideration based on children's needs

The CROC recognises that children living in exceptionally difficult circumstances require special consideration in order for them to be able to enjoy the range of other rights available to them [8] . This principle is particularly applicable to children whose various experiences result in a wide range of impairments that may become apparent during or subsequent to a period of immigration detention in Australia . [9]

Broadly speaking, the special needs of children from refugee backgrounds entering the Australian community can be characterised as follows:

Diagram 1: Relative support and other needs of children entering the community through Australia's humanitarian program

 

It is acknowledged that children exhibiting more serious symptoms of psychological harm as a result of their asylum experiences can access specialised assistance, such as torture and trauma counselling (as is required under Article 39 of the CROC). In the Commission's submission however, and according to the principle of non-discrimination, all children who enter the community following upheaval and a period of enforced detention may be at continuing risk of psychological or developmental impairment and are entitled to receive appropriate and targeted assistance beyond what is currently provided to child TPV holders. This assistance is especially crucial during the initial days and weeks of children's introduction to the community, when the burden of securing basic living needs such as accommodation and employment for the child's parents may take priority over the child's less urgent but equally important needs such as psychological counselling. This early period following release from detention can be seen as a window of opportunity for healing, which if not taken will lead to further damage being done to a child's development, self-esteem and well being.

The Commission submits that there is an obligation on the Commonwealth to provide immediate assessment of the needs of children who have endured upheaval and enforced detention and provision of these needs, given that,

The Commission submits that Australia's obligation of non-discrimination under the CROC requires the early identification of the special needs of children who, due to experiences associated with seeking asylum, require additional and targeted assistance and support. This should be ensured through a structured early assessment and intervention service, independently administered, and made available to children immediately upon release from detention. This service should include referral where appropriate to other services that can assist children's psychological and social integration into the community.

Special needs of unaccompanied children

Unaccompanied child asylum seekers are a particularly vulnerable group following release into the community, and this is recognised to some extent though the provision of specialised services to this group, such at the Refugee Minor Program, administered by the Victorian Department of Human Services.

However the treatment of unaccompanied minors, and in particular, their ineligibility for family reunion rights appears to undermine the long-term health and welfare of members of this group. The lack of family reunion rights for this group also appears to breach the rights accorded to children separated from family and community as a result of persecution, upheaval and displacement from home and family. This right is expressly recognised in Articles 9 and 10(2) of the CROC. Furthermore, ineligibility for family reunion rights appears to breach the obligation on states to ensure that parents can exercise their responsibility for the care and upbringing of their children (Article 18).

Children with disabilities

The obligation of provision of assistance to children with special needs is extended in Article 23 of the CROC, which provides,

'1. States Parties recognize that a mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-reliance and facilitate the child's active participation in the community.'

As mentioned in the previous section, children entering the community following a period of detention are particularly vulnerable to a range of psychological impairments, some subtle, others more severe; this may be in addition to physical impairments inflicted on children through exposure to conflict, torture or other forms of abuse perpetuated in the child's country of origin; or through self-harm whilst in detention.

Child TPV holders, like adults, are entitled to full Medicare services and to torture and trauma counselling services. Unlike those entering the community through the offshore program, however, TPV holders do not receive formal assistance (except through community and volunteer services) to lodge their Medicare application, and incorrect lodgement of a Medicare application can delay the provision of a Medicare card to the recipient. Furthermore, the task of dealing with Australian officials can itself be a daunting - if not terrifying - experience for children who either as a result of their prolonged detention in Australia or persecution in their country of origin have developed a profound fear and distrust of bureaucracy . [12] These factors, it is submitted, frustrate the ability of parents, guardians and others responsible for the care of children with disabilities to seek appropriate assistance and to establish links with the necessary services in the initial stages of settlement into the community.

Right to education

It is widely recognised that education plays a crucial role in the long-term development of children and assists their integration into the community. The right of children to enjoy a comprehensive education is clearly recognised in the CROC; moreover it is a right extended to all children irrespective of whether a child is a recognised citizen of the country in which he or she is detained or has been released from any form of detention (CROC, Article 28).

Children who enter the Australian community through the on-shore humanitarian program are reported in many cases to have endured severe disruption to their education. This disruption can occur in a number of ways:

It is also understood that children's ability to fully participate in and benefit from education can be diminished by previous exposure to traumatic events [14]. Children in this group may require additional and targeted assistance to facilitate integration into the mainstream education system. The principle of special consideration expressed in the CROC requires that children with additional learning requirements should receive appropriate and timely special assistance. This assistance should address the range of needs of child TPV holders including factors outside the school environment that may interfere with a child's ability to fully engage in their education, such as lack of stable accommodation, drug abuse and criminal justice issues.[15]

The right to a safe educational environment

The right of children to participate in education entails that education is provided in a safe environment that is free from harassment, bullying and other harmful behaviours of which vulnerable children are at greater risk. Child TPV holders and other child refugees are a highly visible and hence vulnerable group in the community. There is evidence that children in this group have been subject to marginalisation and vilification within and outside the school community [16]. Other incidents reported to the Commission include,

A further significant impediment to the provision of a safe and stable learning environment to children from refugee backgrounds is the non-availability, under the Commonwealth humanitarian program, of intensive language classes to child TPV holders. In the Commission's submission, the inability of children in this group to set goals (academic or otherwise) beyond the three years' duration of their residency status appears to underlie the difficulties faced by children in this group, their parents and educators.

Right to higher education

Article 28 of the CROC provides,

"1. State parties recognise the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular
…
(c) Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means".

Whilst child TPV holders are entitled to access primary and secondary education on the same terms as other children, including PPV holders, this parity discontinues at the tertiary education stage. Children and young adults who are TPV holders and wish to participate in higher education are required to pay full up-front fees and are not entitled to utilise the higher education contribution scheme (HECS).

Whilst these conditions are equivalent to those applied to overseas fee-paying students, their application to children and young adults who have been granted refugee status following their arrival in Australia has additional implications, in particular,

The ability of child and young TPV holders to access higher education is further impacted by the denial to this group of intensive English classes.

In addition, the Commission has become aware of many instances in which educational scholarships are only offered to permanent Australian citizens and residents, thereby excluding those with temporary residency status. This is the case under many Commonwealth-funded training and apprenticeship schemes. Additionally, many state education institutions also limit scholarships and other programs to those with permanent residency status.

The harm to children and young adults denied access to higher education can be significant, particularly where children are encouraged by their families to pursue a higher education as a way to gain acceptance in the country in which they have been granted refugee status.

In the Commission's submission, the conditions for entry into higher education in Australia effectively exclude, and so indirectly discriminates against, those who experience financial hardship as a result of their passage to Australia or who, due their refugee status, are denied access to scholarships only offered to permanent Australian residents. It is the Commission's view that this exclusion is a breach of Article 28(1)(c) of the CROC.

In summary, the conditions and restrictions of a child or young adult's temporary resident status under the TPV arrangements constitute a significant barrier to this group to participate in education to the highest level, a right enjoyed by permanent Australian residents. As a consequence, children and young TPV holders are effectively prevented from gaining the skills and qualifications necessary for their long-term integration into the Australian workforce and their self-sufficiency.

Right to employment

The right to participate in the workforce is formally extended to all refugees entering the community irrespective of visa status. However, there are significant qualifications to this right, which can be detrimental to children and young adults seeking to enter the workforce for the first time. The most significant of these - the ineligibility of child and young TPV holders for Commonwealth employment services, such as Newstart and Job Network - can be seen to impact on young people unfamiliar with the Australian workforce to a greater degree than their peers. Child and young adult TPV holders denied assistance to find suitable employment in Australia may experience particular difficulty in view of the following:

Discrimination by employers

The Commission is aware of anecdotal information that clearly indicates that refugees with temporary visa status face disproportionate discrimination by employers when applying for employment. Commonwealth job advertisements also frequently state that applicants must be permanent Australian residents. Child and young TPV holders may face the additional barrier of not being able to provide Australian-based referees; or of not having secure and stable accommodation, a frequent requirement of employers. As previously noted, many child and young TPV holders have limited English and are not eligible for intensive language assistance, which is a considerable barrier to finding employment in a competitive and highly skilled job market.

The Commission has considered the situation of individuals who may experience discrimination in the employment market because of their TPV status, and is of the view that it is often unlikely that present anti-discrimination laws would provide a means of redress. Accordingly, TPV holders are not only at risk of greater levels of discrimination, they are potentially denied the right to complain about such treatment. This is not to suggest that the solution necessarily rests with altering the definition of discrimination, rather the cause (and thus the solution) appears to lie in the differential terms attached to TPVs that can make discrimination against TPV holders reasonable in certain circumstances.

An additional barrier - and significant disincentive - for children and young adults with TPV status seeking employment is the withdrawal of the special benefit when a person accumulates 5,000 dollars or more in assets (this is not a restriction that applies to other forms of benefits, such as Newstart). Concurrently, any income earned by a TPV holder is offset through the payment of the special benefit so that for every dollar earned, a dollar comes off the recipient's special benefit. Loss of special benefit also entails loss of other benefits, such as a Health Care card. A further consequence is that children and young adult TPV holders who manage to find employment can find themselves earning less money than they would earn under Special Benefit. These factors have the potential to entrench chronic disadvantage amongst members of this group, by ensuring that those on the level of subsistence are penalised if they begin to acquire stability through employment. It is also noted that the costs of finding and maintaining employment, such as transport, uniform, and tools is likely to be beyond the reach of a person with 5,000 dollars in assets.

Summary

Children and young adults entering the job market for the first time are clearly placed at a disadvantage compared to other job seekers, including those holding permanent visas. Furthermore, child or young adult TPV holders who are able to find employment risk losing their entitlement to other Commonwealth assistance, such as Special Benefit and Health Care Card, which can have serious implications for the person's health and welfare. The Commission has been informed that this situation pushes child and young adults TPV holders into positions of hardship; to the point, for example, where members of this group have resorted to borrowing off moneylenders.

The overall effects of the restrictions placed on children and young adults seeking employment, it is submitted also appears to breach Article 17 of the Convention on the Status of Refugees, which provides,

"Article 17. Wage-earning employment
 1. The Contracting States shall accord to refugees lawfully staying in their territory the most favourable treatment accorded to nationals of a foreign country in the same circumstances, as regards the right to engage in wage-earning employment."

In summary, the TPV regime appears to compel children and young adults to choose between commencing employment or, if a person can afford to, pursue their education. It is submitted that this predicament places children and young people in a position of over-reliance on government, community organisation or volunteer assistance and affects their self-esteem. This situation is incompatible with the obligation on states to recognise the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child's physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. [20]

Right to material and other assistance

Article 27(3) of the CROC provides,

'States Parties, in accordance with national conditions and within their means, shall take appropriate measures to assist parents and others responsible for the child to implement this right and shall in case of need provide material assistance and support programmes, particularly with regard to nutrition, clothing and housing.'

Read in conjunction with Article 2 of the CROC, children and young adults entering the community and recognised as refugees are entitled to receive the assistance outlined in Article 27(3) without distinction of any kind.

The denial to TPV holders of most important of the support services provided to permanent protection refugees calls into question the extent to which this right is upheld in relation to this highly vulnerable and impoverished group. And whilst it is acknowledged that state-based community service providers and volunteers play a crucial role in the provision of these needs to the extent that their resources allow, as signatory to the CROC and the Convention on the Status of Refugees, the primary obligation for providing these needs rests with the Commonwealth. There is also a question about the ability of state-based community services to provide material and other assistance to child and youth refugees who, following release, move of their own accord interstate, away from the service providers with whom they have had initial contact .[21]

Conclusion

It is widely recognised that children released into the community following a period of immigration detention constitute the most impoverished and traumatised group of children in the Australian community. All children in this group, it is submitted, are at risk of harm as a result of their experiences and this assumption should influence every aspect of the treatment of children subsequent to their release into the community. Australia has clearly stated obligations under the CROC to ameliorate the worse effects of the experiences associated with asylum seekers and also to assist children integrate into a stable environment favourable to their recovery. These goals are also fundamental to the notion of the best interests of children. It is the Commission's view that the legal regime to which children who enter Australia by informal means are submitted is fundamentally incompatible with these goals.

The Commission has observed that children who enter the community following the asylum and detention processes are at greater risk of exclusion from the services that are essential to their immediate and long-term welfare. This situation is exacerbated by discriminatory attitudes in the community that marginalise and vilify children who have arrived in Australia by informal means. It is also apparent that children in this group are undermined by the uncertainty of their temporary residency status and the anxiety and restlessness this creates.

Accordingly, the Commission recommends a comprehensive and rigorous re-evaluation of the arrangements for the care and treatment of children released from immigration detention with a view of reaffirming their self-esteem, dignity and self-reliance. This should primarily occur through the reinstatement of services, including free language instruction and the range of settlement services, essential to providing children with a stable and safe environment and assisting their emotional and psychological recovery. Children without links in the community to family or community should be placed in the care of an agency specialising in childcare and with knowledge of culturally appropriate practices, in addition the right of family reunion should be reinstated for all unaccompanied children. Finally, children in the Australian community should receive legal recognition and treatment in accordance with their affirmed refugee status and irrespective of the circumstances that cause the children to be separated from his or her country or origin, family and community.

Bibliography:

Sarah Wise, 'Acculturation, Childcare Selection and Developmental Wellbeing', paper delivered at the Refugees, Humanitarian Settlers and Informal Arrivals' symposium, 26 April 2001.

Megan Saunders, 'Refugees who endure the unthinkable', The Australian, 17 December 2001.

'Australian doctors concerned over detention of children', Lateline, ABC Television, broadcast 19/3/2002.

Multicultural Affairs Queensland, 'Temporary Protection Visa Holders in Queensland', 2002.

'Refugees who endure the unthinkable', Encounter program, 29/7/01, Australian 17/12/01.

'Strangers in our midst', Encounter, Radio National, 29/07/01.

1. As part of this project, the Commission has appointed a dedicated Arabic-speaking community educator to work closely with members of Victoria's Arabic-speaking community.
2. Victorian Multicultural Commission website.
3. For example, the Commission submitted that the right of single women and lesbians to be free from discrimination should not be curtailed in the purported exercise of the right of children, under the CROC, to the care and protection of parents (Cth Senate Legal and Constitutional enquiry, 21 November 2000, 72.)
4. From teaching materials provided by the Victorian Foundation for the Survivors of Torture.
5. Sarah Wise, 'Acculturation, Childcare Selection and Developmental Wellbeing', paper delivered at the Refugees, Humanitarian Settlers and Informal Arrivals' symposium, 26 April 2001.
6. According to the Victorian Department of Human Services (DHS), no more than three to four days' notice is provided to State and community services of refugees being released into the community by the Department of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA) (DHS website).
7. Megan Saunders, 'Refugees who endure the unthinkable', The Australian, 17 December 2001.
8. CROC, Preamble.
9. This issue was discussed in 'Australian doctors concerned over detention of children', Lateline, ABC Television, broadcast 19/3/2002.
10. 'Australian doctors concerned over detention of children', ibid.
11. Sarah Wise, ibid.
12. A father who with his child spent several months in detention told the Commission that the child appeared to be wary of police officers in the community. The father observed that his child appeared to associate police officers with staff at the immigration centre at which they were detained.
13. Amnesty International estimates that more than 300,000 under the age of 18 are fighting in conflicts around the world, Amnesty International website, 'Child soldiers'.
14. 'Australian doctors concerned over detention of children', ibid.
15. Part of this service is provided by the Victorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture (VFST), which operates a school-based program that, among other things, provides professional development programs for teaching professionals to enhance the capacity of teachers to support children and young people from refugee backgrounds.
16. Report by the Australian Arabic Council, 'Racial vilification against Arabic and Muslim Australians in Light of the September 11th terrorist attacks in the United States', October 2001.
17. Megan Saunders, ibid.
18. 'Strangers in our midst', Encounter, Radio National, 29/07/01.
19. Multicultural Affairs Queensland, 'Temporary Protection Visa Holders in Queensland', page 23.
20. CROC, Article 27(1).
21. Megan Saunders, ibid.

Last Updated 10 October 2002.