Australia: Court Crushes “Asylum” Policy Challenge

The New Observer
February 3, 2016

The High Court of Australia has rejected an attempt by a fake asylum seeker from Bangladesh to declare illegal that country’s offshore invader detention center policy.

high-court-australia

“Human rights” lawyers acting for the invader—who has no claim to asylum under any law, local or international—said the fact that she had been allowed to temporarily enter Australia from an offshore detention center for medical treatment meant that she “deserved the full protection of the Australian constitution.”

Six of the seven High Court judges found against the Bangladeshi invader’s claim, and ordered her to pay the government’s costs. The judges found that the law under which the offshore policy was implemented and managed, was supported by the commonwealth’s constitutional power to make laws regarding “aliens.”

“The detention in custody of an alien, for the purpose of their removal from Australia, did not infringe … the Constitution because the authority, limited to that purpose, was neither punitive in character nor part of the judicial power of the Commonwealth,” Chief Justice Robert French co-wrote with justices Susan Kiefel and Geoffrey Nettle.

The ruling means that that Australian government has a legal right to operate the offshore detention centers on Nauru and Manus Island—a policy which halted the then lucrative people smuggler trade in bringing nonwhites from south Asia by boat to Australia to launch bogus asylum claims.

In reality, none of these “boat people” were fleeing any conflict, and were merely trying to get into Australia to parasite off that white-built society—and to get away from their self-created Second and Third World disaster zones.

Until the offshore detention policy was established—whereby the boats were intercepted at sea and the invaders placed in detention centers on Nauru, an island country in Micronesia in the Central Pacific—some 51,000 nonwhites arrived in Australia by sea, demanding to be let in, just as has happened in Europe along the Mediterranean coast.

The Australian government then issued an official and public warning that anyone who tried to enter Australia illegally (by boat or any other method) would not be allowed to settle there under any circumstances.

As soon as this policy was implemented, the nonwhite invasion stopped. Even the leftist opposition Labor Party had to admit that the policy had worked, even if, in their minds, it had only served to save the lives of illegal immigrants drowning at sea.

nauru

The invader detention center in Nauru.

The High Court’s decision has now made it nearly impossible to legally challenge this policy outside of parliament, and its announcement literally reduced the “human rights” lawyers to tears outside the court building.

A group of 267 invaders currently in Australia are now likely to be sent back to Nauru following the High Court ruling.

In the wake of the ruling, Richard Marles, the opposition immigration spokesman, said the government now needed “firmer third-country resettlement options to clear the backlog of asylum-seekers.”

Although the new Australian government appears to be struggling to find a final destination for the invaders in detention at Nauru, it remains a source of mystery why they are simply not sent back to their originating countries.

Join the discussion at TGKBBS