MEDIA RELEASE – For immediate use 21 June 2012
Immigration Amendment Bill legally flawed

The Immigration Amendment Bill is legally flawed due to its noncompliance with New Zealand’s obligations under domestic and international human rights and refugee law, the New Zealand Law Society has told Parliament’s transport and industrial relations committee

As its justification the Bill asserts that “New Zealand faces an on-going risk of mass arrival of illegal migrants” but the Law Society says that this is an unsubstantiated and sweeping assertion.

Presenting the Law Society’s submission on the bill, Dr Rodney Harrison QC said it focused on the imposition of discriminatory sanctions on refugee status claimants who arrive in New Zealand by “mass arrival”, in contrast to those who do not, and was therefore inconsistent with New Zealand’s obligations under the Refugee Convention.

The right to seek asylum in other countries from prosecution was recognised internationally as a fundamental human right. Imposing sanctions on those who arrived here as part of a “mass arrival” and associated measures in the Bill involved an unjustified limit on the right to not be arbitrarily detained, as affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Dr Harrison said many United Nations documents outline that the detention of asylum seekers is inherently undesirable and should normally be avoided.

“Detaining authorities should asses, on a case-by-case basis, whether there is a compelling need to detain an asylum seeker, not just because they arrived in a boat with over 10 people. The Bill shows insufficient regard to alternatives to detention,” he said

The Law Society did not support the proposed detention regime and recommended that the Bill be withdrawn.

“International law draws no distinction between the obligations owed asylum seekers based on mode of arrival. Why is an arrival of only 11 people sufficient to trigger a proposed detention regime?” he asked.

© Scoop Media