Asylum Seeker Case Study

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this case study is to critically analyse the practices and processes in the refugee determination system. Even though this assignment question consists of fictitious characters and made up fact scenarios, these are nevertheless real issues that reflect real-life experiences of asylum seekers.

This paper is structured chronologically where the reader will be taken through every step of the decision making process experienced by an asylum seeker pursuing her claim from the primary stage to her possible ‘removal’.

This paper critically analyses decision-makers from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (‘DIAC’) and the Refugee Review Tribunal (‘RRT’). There is a pressing need for decision-makers to be educated

DIAC officers are required to assess individuals based on their political, social, economic and cultural information from their country of origin. This process is rather a tedious one rather however, officials expedite the matter within inadequate timeframes and produce inconsistent and unjust legal system.

Sometimes, the right to an interview is not guaranteed where without an interview, asylum seekers’ are not able to give their account in detail. Those few who manage to secure an interview on the other hand are refused on the grounds of their credibility findings made on their application.

To exacerbate their application progress, another issue asylum seekers’ face is the statutory limit imposed by DIAC. What is known as the 90-day rule creates unnecessary pressure on DIAC officials to make prompt decisions on a Protection Visa application within 90 days. This unnecessary pressure makes DIAC officials expedite the matter, sometimes refusing asylum seekers’ the right to an interview.

This paper will critically analyse the contentious issues in the refugee process that of their application.

REFUGEE REVIEW

A fact sheet released by Asylum Seeker Resource Centre shows three stages in which one can take to have their case reviewed if their application was not successful.

1.1 Stage 1

If an applicant fails at lodging an application in the first stage, they will have to provide sufficient documentary or any form of evidence to support their application of trying to seek asylum. Upon satisfying the conditions of their application, they will have to attend an interview to present their claim to a case officer from DIAC. The ASRC Human Rights Law Program has voiced their concern after observing applications be refused without an interview.

The nature of protection sought by asylum seekers are critical and the least they should be given is the right to an interview. As no two asylum seeker cases are similar, each case may present its own complexities that can be resolved through an interview. Without the right of an interview, it is rather difficult for a person to narrate their actual ‘lived experience’ in