BY PHIL CHILTON
PERTH — On September 9, about 60 people staged a vigil outside the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs in Perth. The vigil was for Steven Khan.
Khan is one of the asylum seekers locked in Australia's immigration detention centres. In detention for four years, both at Port Hedland and now Perth, he has failed to gain asylum and is now awaiting deportation.
The effects of this kind of prolonged incarceration are devastating: Khan has described the detention centre as a grave with four walls. The rhetoric which justifies the abomination of imprisoning asylum seekers, describes them as undeserving: "illegal" or even "terrorists". The reality is different.
Khan was brought up in Pulwama, a town in Indian-occupied Kashmir. His father owned a printing press that was used by the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), one of the groups struggling for Kashmiri autonomy (independence from India and Pakistan). In 1994, Khan's father was killed by Indian security forces. His body showed signs of torture. The murder impacted so heavily on Khan's mother that she became ill, fell into a coma and three months later also died.
Deeply traumatised, Khan returned to Srinagar, the summer capital of Indian Kashmir, determined to complete his studies. During this time Khan also became increasingly involved with the JKLF and the struggle for Kashmiri independence. In March 1996, he was arrested and taken to the Raj Bag interrogation centre where he was accused of assisting pro-Pakistan armed militants. A search of his house turned up only propaganda leaflets. No evidence of involvement with the armed militants or weapons were found.
Nevertheless, Khan was tortured in an effort to get him to reveal information about Pakistani mujaheddin fighters in Kashmir. During the torture, his left thumbnail was removed and chilli powder poured into the wound, a wooden beam was rolled over his legs, causing excruciating pain, and he was denied sleep and water. He gave them no information on the mujaheddin — he was unconnected with them.
After 10 days of interrogation, Khan was transferred, along with other prisoners, to a central holding location. He believed that he was being taken for execution. On route, their vehicle was attacked by mujaheddin guerrillas seeking to extricate another prisoner who was a section commander of the militants. Khan took the opportunity to escape.
Indian security forces soon raided Khan's village and, according to his cousin, severely beat the male villagers. They were told that Khan was a mujaheddin guerilla and they and their families would be killed if the authorities were not informed of his return to the village.
Khan was able to escape from India and made a harrowing journey that eventually landed him in Australia.
A reasonable person might think Khan's experiences would help sway immigration authorities to grant him asylum. He admits to travelling on false documents: as a fugitive he had little choice. Both Amnesty International and the Kashmir Council of Australia have attested that Khan's life would be in danger if he were returned to India, and have called on the Australian authorities not to deport him.
Steven Khan's case demonstrates the harsh reality of the Australian government's current asylum-seeker policy. It inflicts cruel punishment on people who have already escaped war and persecution.
Why does the government choose to "manage" the asylum seeker situation in this draconian way?
Australian governments have not always dealt with refugee "crises" by locking people up. In the wake of the Vietnam and Cambodian conflicts, Indo-Chinese "boat people" did not face mandatory, or even minimal, detention. For nearly 15 years, such asylum seekers were housed in open centres, allowed to get jobs and leave whenever they could find and pay for their own accommodation. After two years, they had the right to apply for citizenship.
So what has changed?
It is not simply the economic rationalism of the Coalition government. The "Pacific solution" and the maintenance of detention centres are not the most cost-effective ways of processing asylum seeker claims.
The votes that the government can buy through nationalist chest beating and playing on Australians' xenophobia are part of the reason that the government wants to appear tough on "illegals", but the complete answer is more involved.
It appears our rulers have a new ideological imperative, now that the Cold War has ended. In the era of "globalisation", the refugees provide convenient scapegoats for the social ills the present government presides over: cuts to social welfare, the health budget and education. The whipped-up fear of refugees, particularly in the wake of the September 11 attacks in the US, has also justified increased military expenditure.
One of the truly horrifying aspects of the current situation is the lack of effective opposition from the ALP to the scapegoating and fearmongering. The alternative offered by Simon Crean's party leaves the refugees in detention and the razor wire up (albeit perhaps in the "natural" setting of Christmas Island!).
Steven Khan deserves better than that and so do all the people who seek asylum in this country. On the weekend of October 19 and 20, refugees' rights protests will be held around the country. Come out for an end to detention, an end to the camps and freedom for the refugees!
[Phil Chilton is a member of Perth's Refugee Rights Action Network and the Socialist Alliance.]
From 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, September 18, 2002.
Visit the