Australia Defies UN on Deportation Case

[Blewvane]

The sister of a homeless man who was deported from Australia says she is extremely disappointed with the Federal Government's response to a United Nations finding on the matter.

Stefan Nystrom arrived in Australia as a newborn baby, and was deported in 2006 after serving numerous prison terms for serious offences.

Amanda Vanstone, then the immigration minister, had decided to deport Mr Nystrom to Sweden, his country of birth, because he had never become an Australian citizen.

But Mr Nystrom and his family challenged that decision in the courts, arguing he had assumed that he was a citizen because he had only spent the first 27 days of his life in Sweden and had never left Australia.

The High Court upheld the Government's decision, but last year the UN Human Rights Committee found the deportation was a breach of his rights and said Australia had an obligation to help him return.

But the Government has now advised the committee that it disagrees and says it will not allow Mr Nystrom to re-enter Australia.

Mr Nystrom's sister, Annette Turner, says he is homeless, unemployed, mentally ill and does not speak Swedish.

"I just know it's wrong. What do we do about it, I don't know now," she said. "I feel like I should be able to help my brother."

Mr Nystrom was sent to Sweden in spite of not being able to speak the language.

His family says he has spent years without a job and without access to the medication he needs for anxiety, depression and serious paranoia.

Now that he is living rough, his family has no way to contact him.

"I hate the thought that he does spend nights out in the cold out sleeping in clothing bins," Ms Turner said.

"He has good days and he has bad days and I think what I find really hard - and obviously what Mum finds really hard when we do speak to him - is if he's having a bad day and we have to leave the phone call knowing that's he's not coping.

"We just have to cross our fingers and wait and hope that we hear from him again.

"You do sometimes think we're going to get a phone call one day saying that something's happened... I don't want to get that call."

Defiant stance

The UN Human Rights Committee ruled last year that Australia had broken its international agreements by deporting Mr Nystrom, and that he should be brought back to this country.

But the Federal Government has now written a letter of response, saying repeatedly that it "respectfully disagrees" with the committee.

"On this occasion, the Australian Government is unable to agree with... the Committee," the letter says.

"As stated in the Australian Government's submissions, Mr Nystrom's visa was cancelled after a thorough consideration of his case based on his history of criminal behaviour.

"This decision was affirmed by the Federal Court and upheld in the High Court.

"His removal from Australia was effected in accord with the provisions of the Migration Act, which provides for the cancellation of the visas of non-citizens where it is necessary to protect the Australian community from people of bad character."

"As Mr Nystrom is a citizen of Sweden, the Australian Government does not intend to allow or facilitate Mr Nystrom's return to Australia."

A spokeswoman for Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said the minister was not available to be interviewed on the subject.

But in a statement, she said: "The Government is aware of the UNHRC's judgement and has responded accordingly."

"The Australian people expect that people coming to live in Australia respect our laws."

"The Government takes very seriously its responsibility to protect the Australian community from unacceptable risk of harm from criminal or other serious conduct by non-citizens.

"All non-citizens who wish to enter or remain in Australia must satisfy the requirements of the Migration Act and Regulations, including the character test."

Response condemned

The Human Rights Law Centre has issued a statement condemning the response.

"Australia is flagrantly violating its international human rights obligations and undermining the rule of law by refusing to abide by a decision of the United Nations Human Rights Committee - the world's highest expert human rights body," the statement says.

"In the landmark decision of Nystrom v Australia issued in September 2011, the Committee held that Australia violated the human rights of a permanent resident, Stefan Nystrom, by deporting him to Sweden."

"Australia was given six months to abide by international law and to support Mr Nystrom to return home.

"However, in a stunning rebuke, the Australian Government has now advised the Committee that it "respectfully disagrees" with the decision and will not allow Mr Nystrom to re-enter the country.

"The Government's brazen decision is also completely at odds with the UN Security Council candidacy which pitches Australia as a country which 'does what we say'."

Barrister Brian Walters SC, who acted pro bono for Mr Nystrom, also says the Government's decision could damage international relations, noting that Sweden requested that Australia not deport Mr Nystrom on humanitarian grounds.

"The Human Rights Committee is an eminent body of independent international human rights experts," he says in a statement.

"Quite rightly, Australia has submitted to the jurisdiction of that committee.

"Now it should do the right thing, abide by international law, give effect to the committee's judgment, and bring Stefan home."
http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/...ortation-case/

[Blewvane]

Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Broadcast: 25/04/2012

Reporter: Jeff Waters


A lawyers' group claims Australia has jeopardised its bid for a UN Security Council seat by defying a ruling of the UN Human Rights Committee.

Transcript
TONY JONES, PRESENTER: A lawyers group claims Australia has jeopardised its bid for a UN Security Council seat by defying a ruling of the UN Human Rights Committee.

After a lengthy legal case, the committee ruled Australia had broken international law by deporting a man who’d spent all but the first month of his life living here. It urged Canberra to bring him back from Sweden.

But as Jeff Waters reports, that call has been ignored.

JEFF WATERS, REPORTER: Annie Turner says she lives in fear for her brother Stefan Nystrom. He's mentally ill, without proper medication and homeless in far-away Sweden and she's unable to contact him.

ANNIE TURNER, SISTER: He suffers depression, he suffers anxiety, he suffers severe paranoia.

JEFF WATERS: Stefan Nystrom was departed in 2006 after serving time in jail for a series of serious criminal offences. He'd been out and going straight for three years. But the then immigration minister deported him to Sweden because he'd been born and spent his first month there. Nystrom assumed he was an Australian citizen.

Stefan Nystrom's situation overseas went all the way to a United Nation's tribunal which ruled last year that Australia had broken international agreements by deporting him. Well the Federal Government has now responded to that by writing to the United Nations and saying that it simply respectfully disagreed with that ruling.

Lawyers say you can't have it both ways at the UN.

RACHEL BALL, HUMAN RIGHTS LAW CENTRE: The Australian Government has built its bid for a seat on the UN Security Council around the slogan, "We do what we say." In this case, they've done the exact opposite. They undermined their candidacy by undermining the UN human rights system.

ANNIE TURNER: We're just going to get a phone call one day, you know, saying that something's happened. And it's - you know, they're the days that I just - yeah, I don't want that phone call.

JEFF WATERS: The Immigration Minister wasn't available for an interview, but a spokeswoman says the Government is aware of the judgment and has responded by disagreeing with it because people coming to live in Australia are expected to respect our laws.

Jeff Waters, Lateline.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/conte...2/s3489015.htm

[Blewvane]

Australia is under constant attack from Navi Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Why? Fucked if i know but that cunt has a serious stick up her arse whenever she hears the word Australia.
See for yourself. Google her name and Australia.

[rob666]

I'm not opposed to immigration, but if someone is just fucking jail bum criminal then get them the fuck out.
No second chance.

[Blewvane]

Australian law, like most other countries, states that if a non citizen breaks the law they are deported to their country of birth after serving their sentence. Why does the UN even have a say in this? Why does Navi Pillay have such a stick up her arse when it comes to Australia? Navi Pillay is a fucking terrorist and only got her position because she is black.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by Blewvane

Australian law, like most other countries, states that if a non citizen breaks the law they are deported to their country of birth after serving their sentence. Why does the UN even have a say in this? Why does Navi Pillay have such a stick up her arse when it comes to Australia? Navi Pillay is a fucking terrorist and only got her position because she is black.

you cunts deport kiwis all the time

three cheers for the U.N

big meany aussies

[Blewvane]

Originally Posted by NiteFlyer

you cunts deport kiwis all the time

three cheers for the U.N

big meany aussies

Awww come on Nite you know i love you, but -"Australian law, like most other countries, states that if a non citizen breaks the law they are deported to their country of birth after serving their sentence."
Accept annexation to Australia, that way you will benefit from our strong economy, i will call you brother, and you guys won't be able to be deported.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by Blewvane

Awww come on Nite you know i love you, but -"Australian law, like most other countries, states that if a non citizen breaks the law they are deported to their country of birth after serving their sentence."
Accept annexation to Australia, that way you will benefit from our strong economy, i will call you brother, and you guys won't be able to be deported.

yeah i know i looked her up too

what exactly did australia do to her?

talk about having a bone up her ass

[Blewvane]

Originally Posted by NiteFlyer

yeah i know i looked her up too

what exactly did australia do to her?

talk about having a bone up her ass

I don't know. As far as i am concerned she is just a senile racist curry eating fuckwit and the world would benefit from her death, i know us Aussies wouldn't shed a tear if it happened.

[Nite]

hahahahaha
fucking hypocritical bitch
http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/20...worst-abusers/