Australia’s Trolley Problem: Balancing Security Threats in Offshore Detention Facilities

In 2001, the Norwegian freighter ship, the Tampa rescued 433 Afghan asylum-seekers from an overcrowded boat stranded in international waters. Under the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, the ship was obligated to take the refugees on board, but when Captain Arne Rinnan came to dock at Christmas Island, they received an unwelcome shock: then-Prime Minister John Howard would not allow the ship to unload in the interest of Australia’s national safety, protecting the country from an “uncontrollable number of illegal arrivals” in Australia.

Since dubbed the “Tampa affair,” the incident has had long-lasting effects on Australia’s immigration policies. Within 8 days of the Tampa rescuing the asylum seekers, the “Pacific Solution” was passed. This hastily devised legislature stated that asylum seekers who attempt to arrive in Australia via boat are seized and transferred to Regional Processing Centres (RPCS) in Nauru and Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island -both countries heavily reliant on Australian aid. In doing this, alongside the hiring of private security firms like Serco, G4S, and the Geo Group, Australia becomes “absolved” of responsibility towards the refugees.

Their absolution never comes. By August 2013, the government had built the proposed facilities, quickly filling them with hopeful refugees. By December of the same year, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees found that refugees were being held in “arbitrary detention in conditions that do not meet international standards” . Countless human rights violations have been reported, including assault, sexual abuse, ill-treatment and suspicious deaths. There have been 14 deaths in detention centres in Nauru and Manus Island , with the leading causes being suicide and medical neglect. In 11 years, more than 3000 asylum seekers have been forcibly removed from Australian waters to be held in these sites.

Despite the Australian government’s promises that only dangerous criminals were being subjected to this fate, it was quickly found that dozens of children were being detained as well. As years passed and more information surrounding the offshore detention facilities came to light -including in the 2016 release of the horrific Nauru files– it became clear that successive Australian governments were not concerned about national safety, but about furthering their anti-immigration agenda.

A Glimmer of Hope?

By 2019, after years of protesting the detention facilities, it seemed like positive changes were happening. The Medevac legislation was intended to streamline the process for sick asylum seekers and refugees in Nauru and Manus Island, enabling them to be transferred to Australia for medical treatment. Strict timelines and a team of medical professionals, social workers, and lawyers gave hope that this latest policy change would aid asylum seekers. The path to receiving a medical transfer is a rigorous one, with ailing refugees needing to be evaluated in person by two doctors, then have their case reviewed by a panel of doctors in Australia, with their final fate resting in the hands of a government minister, who can deny the case “on character, security concerns, or on medical grounds” .

Despite this, the United Nations High Commission of Refugees (UNHCR) found that the Medevac legislation proved to be a “timely, effective and often life-saving programme”  for seriously ill individuals. Yet, in the same year it was put into action, the Australian government repealed it on concerns that the legislation was a risk to national security and a “loophole” for refugees to enter Australia.

This erasure of the rights of newcomers continues today. In 2024, Australia passed new legislature that further undermined the rights of refugees, including dropping safeguards against refoulement, the power to revoke refugee status, and the ability to incarcerate individuals who refuse to cooperate in their deportation. Combining this with the termination of the Medevac legislature, Australia is becoming all but uninhabitable for people seeking refuge.

What’s next?

In deciding what to do next, Australia is faced with a “trolley problem” of epic proportions: Do they continue to deny the few to preserve the protected majority? Or do they aid a minority and risk a perceived threat to national security? Several urgent recommendations are proposed by a joint report by the Refugee Council of Australia, the Human Rights Law Centre, and the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law .

These include ending the mandatory detention of any person without a visa and making the use of closed detention a last resort measure; ending offshore processing facilities and providing permanent resettlement in Australia or safe third countries; and repealing the ‘Fast Track’ asylum process -a system that uses a diminished and unfair version of the United Nation’s definition of refugee– and reinstituting a fair refugee determination process that complies with international standards. The United Nations Committee Against Torture agree with these recommendations and goes further, recommending that Australia raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility, which is currently set at 10; prohibit the use of physical restraints to discipline children under supervision; and immediately end the practice of solitary confinement for children across all jurisdictions.

In the wake of these recommendations, there have been some positive results on behalf of the Australian government. Following a series of escalating riots in 2014 and 2015 and subsequent legal battles involving former G4S employees, the family of a killed detainee, and the Australian government, the Manus Island detention facility was permanently closed in 2021. Despite this improvement, the population of the Nauru immigration detention facility is slowly growing -with some refugees being detained there for over a decade .

With multiple newly elected right-leaning governments in place and even more gaining traction, 2025 is all but guaranteed to bring forth more bad news for those seeking refuge. In this climate, it’s crucial to uphold beacons of hope for vulnerable populations. Powerful Western democracies like Australia have the opportunity to continue this legacy. With nearly seventy-nine per cent of Australians supporting a Royal Commission into Australia’s offshore detention policy, it seems like the right decision. Future compliance with the Refugee Council of Australia’s and the United Nations’ recommendations is necessary for asylum seekers to transition to a safe life in Australia. These changes ensure a long path ahead of Australian lawmakers, but it is one well worth taking.