🔗 Share this article

Nauru is exploring sending back asylum seekers from the designated group to their home countries, according to the island's leader in a newly interpreted interview from last winter.

These remarks has generated prolonged controversy, with erroneous statements that those transferred to the island were not asylum seekers and could be returned to their countries of origin where possible.

Asylum Claims Verified

Sources indicate that individuals of the cohort in question have had their asylum applications recognized by Australian authorities. A number of the men currently on the island to Nauru are among those who are asylum seekers.

A partial transcript of the president's remarks was earlier disclosed, and entire text was entered into official records by senators recently.

Translation Dispute

The interpreted text used was not the official translation, but externally verified translation acquired by a advocacy center.

Authorities has repeatedly opposed disclosure of its interpretation of the discussion, even securing a gag order in the judicial system.

Responding to a Senate order to produce the official translation, the foreign affairs minister wrote that its disclosure would “harm the nation's foreign ties … and our broader standing in the region.”

Forced Removals and International Law

Five or more individuals of the group in question have been sent to Nauru and are being detained at a detention facility on the island nation.

The government is bound by law to protect refugees under the UN agreement and must not send them back to their home country where they face a “real risk of being targeted.”

Should that return is made through a intermediary nation – like Nauru – it is illegal, known in global legal standards as “successive returns.”

The island nation is also a party to the treaty.

President's Remarks

The president gave the discussion in February, using the local language to a government staff member, and outlining the bilateral arrangement the island had signed with Australia to host individuals of the designated group.

The arrangement will see the government transfer money as much as $2.5 billion over 30 years.

The president claimed those sent to the island by authorities would remain in Nauru for three decades.

“Unless of course, we, your government, identify a solution for them to relocate, for example; they get to go home,” he said. “The problem now is Australia, these people are what you would refer to as without citizenship. “Their countries of origin are unwilling to take them back and they have no means to return. And if eventually we discover a method to send them back then of course they will not complete the three-decade period, but the permit we are issuing to begin is three decades.”

Reports suggest none of the men transferred under the arrangement currently are without citizenship.

Erroneous Statements

The president asserted multiple times – falsely – that members of the group were not refugees.

“To clarify, these people are not refugees. They are common citizens but their past is that they have served prison sentences. “These days, they are at liberty around the country and while they are no longer under penalties but they are not from there and despite the government's desire to send them home, they are cannot.”

Background on NZYQ Cohort

The NZYQ cohort is a collection of over 350 foreign nationals freed from ongoing detention in Australia after a high court ruling in the end of last year.

Residency permits had been cancelled on “character grounds”, the majority as a due to a legal offense. Most have finished a incarceration but must not be sent back to their countries of origin because they are threatened there. Some have been in Australia for many years and have family members who are citizens.

Legal and Ethical Objections

A political figure remarked that the statement that the NZYQ cohort were not refugees was “clearly incorrect.”

“Could authorities have misled them? Possibly officials misinformed the island's authorities? Do they support what the leader said about these people lacking asylum status? Are they all excluded? “And they’re probably also embarrassed by the fact that President Adeang has made it abundantly clear he desires their deportation from the place of origin. We know that they have faced threats generally.”

The advocacy lead at a refugee support organization said the confidentiality around its offshore program was “extremely worrying.”

He said the secrecy and cover-ups weakened faith, and wrongdoing prospered in the lack of transparency of the offshore regime.

“This document discloses initially that the island aims to return refugees to their home nations ‘when possible’, despite the fact that these are individuals the government has not removed to their country of origin because they are refugees. This means the authorities has indirectly delegated forcible return – funding an intermediary to do what the nation cannot lawfully do.”

He said the discussion – the release of which was resisted by the authorities – uncovered a dangerous loophole.

“Australia states it adheres to international law while secretly funding for refugees to be deported to danger via external agreements.”

A senior lawyer of a legal center said the authorities had tried to hide “almost all aspects” of its agreement with the island.

“Now we learn that the Nauruan government may not have any intention of fulfilling its part of this lamentable deal.”

She said the forced removals to the island must be ceased, because the authorities is unable to promise refugees' protection.

“Officials is tearing people away from their homes and loved ones in Australia and sending them away to a place where they are unaccepted. The authorities has known all along that it risks dispatching people to their deaths – through lack of healthcare they require to live, or by sending them back to the nations they escaped from.”

Questions have been submitted to the relevant departments and the Nauruan government.