A DECISION AGAINST HUMAN RIGHTS

A DECISION AGAINST HUMAN RIGHTS

  • Add Comments
  • Print
  • Add to Favorites

Australian government’s decision to deport all asylum seekers who arrive by boat to the Australian shores to Papua New Guinea is a decision against human rights and democracy. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in his statement said that this decision is intended to reduce the loss of lives of these refugees and to stop the business of people smugglers. Sending these asylum seekers to a small and impoverished island country of Papua New Guinea is against universal rights of refugees. The Australian government has to understand that people cannot easily leave their home land and society to become refugees in a foreign land. It is either due to ill treatment of government or a fight for freedom and human rights which makes people become refugees in a foreign land. We have seen many such instances in our history where freedom fighters have fled as refugees to other countries so as to protect themselves from the whims of the government; Notable example being Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, a famous Indian freedom fighter who seeked refuge in Paris under Madame Bikaiji Cama in order to safeguard himself from the British government.

The rulers of the Australian government should remember that their ancestors were also people who came by sea to Australia as settlers. It seems as though the Australian government still has characteristics of their colonial masters loyal to the union jack.

One cannot forget the riots by the protestors during the award giving ceremony on Australia day on January 26 this year against the then Prime minister Julia Gillard and Opposition leader Tony Abott , that led to them being urgently escorted to safety by security personnel . A cordon of Aboriginal demonstrators stormed the area protesting against the celebration of Australia day and for denial of rights by the government to the aboriginal people of Australia. The United Nations organisation has to take the initiative as an international organisation upholding human rights and should condemn the Australian government for enacting such laws and should not act only as a representative upholding the rights of Western and European people.

Related posts:

  1. Sri Ramar Bridge
  2. THE RIPPLES OF THE INDIAN POLICY
  3. EGYPTIANS BEGAN

No Comments to “A DECISION AGAINST HUMAN RIGHTS”

add a comment.

Leave a Reply