Aerial view of an Australian-run detention centre on Nauru. A Senate inquiry into conditions in the detention centre has been told pregnant women are at risk because of the long distances they have to walk for water or medical care. Photograph: Remi Chauvin for the Guardian.
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Pregnant asylum seekers on Nauru have been forced to create makeshift toilets and have decreased their water intake to avoid walking long distances, Save the Children has told a Senate inquiry.
A Senate inquiry is currently underway into allegations of sexual assault and conditions on Nauru. It was launched following the release of a review by former integrity commissioner Philip Moss, which substantiated some allegations of sexual abuse at Australia’s detention centre on the island.
A number of submissions made publicly available detail serious concerns about the care of vulnerable people on the island.
While the immigration department and Wilson Security have defended their role in the administration of the centre, Save the Children reported serious concerns in its submissions, and made a number of recommendations for the improvement of care.
It said in its submissions:
Pregnant women on Nauru have deliberately decreased their water intake, posing risks due to high temperatures on the island. In some cases Save the Children had been aware they had not received medical treatment due to difficulties in walking to the medical clinic. The submission also said no maternity clothing is made available to the women, instead forcing them to wear their husband’s clothes or trade with other asylum seekers.
Australia’s policy towards asylum seekers was a “piecemeal and incomplete policy response, aspects of which are driven more by political considerations than any desire to find a sustainable and humane approach”.
Young children and infants are forced to live in “cramped accommodation which can give rise to an increased risk of infection”. It recommended no further infants should be transferred to Nauru.
It also said it had been documenting allegations of sexual assaults and other incidents throughout 2013.
“Incidents of abuse and harm of asylum seekers at the Nauru RPC [regional processing centre] have been clearly documented since Save the Children first began providing services there in 2013. These events have been recorded by Save the Children in incident reports, through case notes and via other monitoring processes in accordance with guidelines and protocols at Nauru RPC,” the submission said.
Save the Children was also concerned by developmental regression and mental illness among children, instances of family violence and the breakdown of family relationships as a result of immigration detention.
“These observations together with the documented incidents, very clearly and comprehensively demonstrate how prolonged immigration detention threatens the physical, mental and emotional wellbeing of asylum seekers, particularly children.”
Its submission outlined several personal case studies from asylum seeker children who had been affected by trauma – but each was redacted by the Senate committee. It also made a number of recommendations to improve conditions at the centre.
Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said evidence was mounting Nauru was a dangerous place for women and children.
“It’s time we started calling the Nauru detention for what it is – a tent prison,” Hanson-Young said. “The unseemly conditions detailed in the submissions to this Inquiry uncover a horrendous culture of neglect and desperation.
“Every day children are left locked up inside is another day they are damaged. The minister can’t pretend he doesn’t know how sick this prison is making these young children. Leaving them locked up is mental torture.”
Asylum seekers wet bed at night to avoid guards, doctor says
Prof David Isaacs, who spent time on Nauru and inspected the medical facilities there, warned the living conditions for asylum seekers on the island placed them at significant risk.
“I visited the asylum seekers’ living quarters. They live in tents; each family’s tent adjoins the next. There is no privacy from neighbours and less from guards, who can enter tents unannounced any time. Only tents for children under 5 are air-conditioned. The interior of many other tents is mouldy,” he said.
“Tents are 30 to 120 metres from the nearest washing and toilet facilities. To go to the toilet at night involves crossing dark, open land, often under the gaze of large male guards. Many children and some mothers had nocturnal enuresis (bed-wetting at night) rather than run the gauntlet of a night-time toilet visit. Many women have insufficient sanitary towels and use clothes and material to soak up the blood.”
Isaacs spoke with one asylum seeker who alleged she had been sexually assaulted by a cleaner.
“When interviewing the mother of a young patient referred to me, she confided to me that she had been raped by a cleaner when she went to the toilet at night. She said she had told Senator Hanson-Young but had not told the police because she feared repercussions and did not want her husband to know.”
Hanson-Young’s initial interview with the asylum seeker sparked the Moss review into the centre.
“She told me that since the rape, one guard had offered her extra shower time in return for sexual favours (each person was restricted to two minutes a day because of water restrictions), and on another occasion a different guard offered marijuana in return for sexual favours.
“She wept uncontrollably for 10 minutes when telling me her story, which I had no reason to doubt. I discussed the rape with senior IHMS medical colleagues and we arranged for the mother to see an IHMS psychologist to try to help her cope with the trauma.”
Immigration department “building robust frameworks” to handle sexual and physical assault
The immigration department defended its handling of serious incidents at the Nauru detention centre, and said it had put in a number of systems to ensure the wellbeing of asylum seekers.
It cited the creation of a new child protection task force on Nauru and the formation of the detention assurance team as two measures implemented to improve oversight at the centre. It also said a new mental health screening policy had been reviewed and was finalised in April 2015.
“With regards to administration of the centre, improvements have been made through clarifying roles and responsibilities in safety and security management across service providers and local authorities, improved physical security measures and site control, regular safety and security risk assessments, enhanced information sharing practices, and staff training.”
It also maintained in its own submission Nauru “owns and administers” the detention centre, and reiterated Nauru is the “key decision maker” in determining the management of asylum seekers.
But the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) said there was ample evidence in its own submission the Australian government had “effective control” of the centre.
“Australia cannot avoid its human rights obligations under international law by transferring asylum seekers to a third country,” it said.
“The commission considers that there are a number of factors which would support the conclusion that Australia is exercising effective control over the asylum seekers transferred to and detained in Nauru.”
In its own submission AHRC recommended unless the risks to asylum seekers on Nauru were addressed immediately all asylum seekers should be transferred to be held in Australia.
The immigration department also foreshadowed it may resist attempts by the Senate committee to compel it to provide information to ensure it is protected from “exposure or recrimination”.
It went on to say it became concerned about leaks of information from the island and confirmed it had referred a number of those allegations to the Australian federal police.
“The department also grew increasingly concerned about potential misuse of information and unauthorised disclosure of material following a number of information security breaches over the course of 2014,” the submission said.
“In particular, the department became concerned about the perceived lack of responsiveness by one of the service providers to the issue of information security.”
Guardian Australia understands in correspondence between the Australian federal police and the immigration department, articles from a number of journalists were supplied in relation to investigations into disclosures of information.
Nauru descending into “rogue state”
The Nauruan government was descending into a “rogue state” that lacked an independent judiciary and had failed to investigate serious allegations of assaults made by asylum seekers, a former Nauru magistrate warned the inquiry.
Peter Law said the country had attempted to stifle dissent by indefinitely suspending opposition members from the Nauruan parliament, and had failed to demonstrate any commitment to the rule of law.
His comments to the inquiry follow the US government raising concerns about restrictions on Facebook and other social media sites on the island.
The Nauruan government has also introduced a new law that could see political opponents and asylum seekers who protest on the island jailed for up to seven years.
Law identified a series of failures – ranging from police inaction when serious allegations were raised, to the lack of an independent media on Nauru – he said point towards a serious breakdown in the island’s democratic processes.
“Without a functioning opposition and without any media scrutiny, there is no accountability for actions of the government or their agencies. In turn, there is no accountability for aid money and for the significant financial contributions by the Australian government,” Law said.
“There should be some expectations attached to aid funding such as compliance with the rule of law and the separation of powers between government and judiciary. Without this there will never be a safe haven in Nauru for resettled refugees,” Law said.
Law, an Australian, was deported from the country in 2014 after he halted the deportation of two residents from the island. The former chief magistrate Geoffrey Eames was also removed from the island.
Law told the committee in his submission: “The failure of the government of Nauru to demonstrate any commitment to the rule of law by their actions outlined above, when combined with their ostracism of members of parliament, raise very serious questions about commitment to democracy and the ‘separation of powers’.
“Why is it the Australian government has no expectations as to the conduct of this ‘rogue state’ despite providing the bulk of its funds for survival?”
Australia makes substantial aid contributions to Nauru, and also funds the costs of the Nauru detention centre on the island.
Law urged the Senate inquiry to establish the “full costs to the Australian taxpayers to date” and to provide clear estimates of the ongoing costs of Australia’s aid and financial contributions to Nauru.
The Senate inquiry into Nauru is set to hold its first public hearing on Tuesday.