Australia as a Powerbroker on Refugee Protection in Southeast Asia: The Relationship with Indonesia

Using the example of Australian-Indonesian cooperation on deterrence of asylum seekers in transit through Indonesia to Australia, this article challenges the view that Australia is a regional hegemon. It does this through two main methods. First, it engages in a close analysis of the shifting relationship between the two countries on refugee and asylum-seeker issues through different periods since 2001 to 2016. This demonstrates that the relationship is in fact more nuanced than previously suggested by other scholars. Second, it refers to Thomas Pedersen’s political concept of “cooperative hegemony,” which focuses upon “ideationalinstitutional realism” as a lens through which to view regional co-operation. It analyzes the institutional nature of the Australian–Indonesian cooperation relationship in the Southeast Asian context, to demonstrate that Australia has not established itself as a model of “cooperative hegemony.”En prenant l’exemple de la coopération australo-indonésienne pour dissuader les demandeurs d’asile traversant l’Indonésie sur la route de l’Australie, cet article conteste le point de vue d’une hégémonie régionale de l’Australie par un travail en deux temps. Il rapporte tout d’abord une analyse approfondie de la relation ambiguë qu’ont entretenue les deux pays sur la question des réfugiés et des demandeurs d’asile d’une période à l’autre entre 2001 et 2016, et démontre que cette relation est en pratique plus nuancée que celle auparavant décrite par d’autres universitaires. Il fait ensuite référence au concept politique d’« hégémonie coopérative » de Thomas Pedersen, qui met l’accent sur le « réalisme idéationnel-institutionnel » en tant que prisme d’analyse de la coopération régionale, pour examiner la nature institutionnelle de la relation de coopération qu’entretiennent l’Indonésie et l’Australie dans le contexte du Sud-Est asiatique et ainsi démontrer que cette dernière ne s’est pas imposée comme modèle d’« hégémonie coopérative »

Offshoring Asylum and Migration in Australia, Spain, Tunisia and the US: Lessons learned and feasibility for the EU. CEPS Research Reports, September 2018

This report examines the feasibility of extra-territorial processing of asylum and migration management for the EU. Based on a comparative account of past and current experiences of extra-territorialisation of asylum processing and migration policies in Australia, Spain, Tunisia, and the US, the Report draws 'lessons learned' and identifies key challenges from the perspective of their effectiveness. The findings highlight how external processing of asylum applications is politically, legally and operationally unfeasible and ineffective for the EU. It would pose profound challenges to EU and Member States' rule of law and human rights obligations. Past and current policies outsourcing protection obligations to third countries often amount to extra-legal processes as well as violations of the principle of non-refoulement and of the prohibition of arbitrary detention under inhuman and degrading conditions. The research findings show that extraterritorial actions of the EU and its Member States abroad would fall to varying degrees under EU and domestic judicial, administrative and financial accountabilities which present strong potentials for bringing portable justice to potential victims of human rights violations. In this way, this report contributes to and suggests ways forward in creative legal thinking to close any loopholes inherent to ideas on extraterritorial asylum processing and migration management for the EU

Key challenges in simulated patient programs: An international comparative case study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The literature on simulated or standardized patient (SP) methodology is expanding. However, at the level of the program, there are several gaps in the literature. We seek to fill this gap through documenting experiences from four programs in Australia, Canada, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. We focused on challenges in SP methodology, faculty, organisational structure and quality assurance.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used a multiple case study method with cross-case synthesis. Over eighteen months during a series of informal and formal interactions (focused meetings and conference presentations) we documented key characteristics of programs and drew on secondary document sources.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Although programs shared challenges in SP methodology they also experienced differences. Key challenges common to programs included systematic quality assurance and the opportunity for research. There were differences in the terminology used to describe SPs, in their recruitment and training. Other differences reflected local conditions and demands in organisational structure, funding relationships with the host institution and national trends, especially in assessments.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This international case study reveals similarities and differences in SP methodology. Programs were highly contextualised and have emerged in response to local, institutional, profession/discipline and national conditions. Broader trends in healthcare education have also influenced development. Each of the programs experienced challenges in the same themes but the nature of the challenges often varied widely.</p

2. Trois figures de la femme : actrice, victime et réfugiée. Contribution au débat sur la traite des personnes

Le problème de la traite des personnes à des fins sexuelles ou en vue d’autres formes d’exploitation n’est pas nouveau, mais ce n’est que récemment que l’on s’y intéresse de près sur les plans national, régional et international. Ceci s’explique par le fait que la traite des personnes est considérée aujourd’hui comme l’un des aspects de la criminalité transnationale organisée, associé au phénomène de la migration irrégulière internationale. L’élaboration de la Convention des Nations Unies con..

La justice naturelle et les non-citoyens : Une question d'intégrité ?

Susan Kneebone, Université Monash, Melbourne, Australie[À l'origine dans / Was originally part of : CRDP - Droit et nouveaux rapports sociaux]Présentation sur le concept de la justice naturelle et plus précisément le droit à l'audience des demandeurs du statut de réfugié, tel que construit par les juges de la Cour suprême du Canada et par les juges de la High Court d'Australie, et examiné à la lumière de la théorie de l'intégrité de Ronald Dworkin

The role of the opposition in India & Malaysia

published_or_final_versionComparative Asian StudiesMasterMaster of Art

The Human Rights Implications of Australian and Indonesian Anti-Smuggling Laws

Kneebone S, Missbach A. The Human Rights Implications of Australian and Indonesian Anti-Smuggling Laws. International Journal of Migration and Border Studies (IJMBS). 2018;4(4):379-396