Page

voluntarily signed the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 – they imposed the principle of non-refoulement (the non-return of asylum seekers to their home country) upon themselves. Why – if Australia is so determined at every stage to undermine the process of asylum and place those fleeing persecution in appalling conditions – would they commit to human rights obligations they clearly do not want to fulfil?

Australia’s refugee policy is not scrutinised enough in the international media – it is only when a high-profile case is decided, or, in this case, a high-profile tennis player spends five days among asylum seekers – that proper light is shone on the procedure. Exposing Australia’s refugee policy on the world stage is entirely up to us – should we decide that everybody - regardless of nationality or immigration status - is worthy of fair procedures and being treated humanely? Or should we treat asylum seekers, as Australia’s Government has done on many occasions, as someone else’s problem? Those demonstrating outside of Djokovic’s immigration hotel firmly believed in the former, and begged the world to listen this time. One protestor summed the situation up in 12 simple words on his placard: “Will you remember our friends when Djokovic leaves on his private jet?”

Gallery

Please enjoy some photos from our January Launch Event of Issue 2, themed on Access to Justice, in collaboration with Trinity FLAC.

Below: Frequent Contributor, Eoin Jackson

Photographs courtesy of Jacob Hudson, SF Law and Political Science

Above (L-R): Síofra Carlin, Chairperson of Trinity FLAC, Matthew O’Shea, Editor in Chief of The Eagle, Katharina Neumann, Deputy Editor of The Eagle