A report in today’s Age about the plight of refugee women, victims of domestic violence, who forced by our law to choose between staying with their abuser or being deported to an even more dangerous situation from which they originally fled strikes me as enormously important.
Anyone who’s opposed to amending the law so that’s a choice no woman has to face, ever, should read Rupa’s story and seriously question why they would support, in 2012, Australia ever putting a woman in a position where she has little choice but to remain the victim of domestic violence. How is this defensible? How is this not an outrage where the Minister is being surrounded by reporters demanding an answer? How is this not headline news?
The story was published this morning. Here’s a challenge: right now, just after lunch, can you find it anywhere on The Age‘s main site?
9 Comments
It’s there now.
But you are correct, this is an important story and requires major attention from the media.
It is dreadful that gender is NOT one of the 5 grounds for claiming persecution under the refugees convention. There are many women who are facing deportation because women escaping male violence is not covered by the convention.
The Federal Government must respond [hopefully it probably will ?] to the Australian Law Reform’s recommendations to protect women escaping abusive relationships.
Have we (as a country) yet done anything about the deal whereby we deport women who’ve been sex-trafficked? With perhaps a short reprieve if (and while) they testify against the perps?
Matthew.
Not sure [I know the question wasn't directed to me but ...] but a good site to check current status is CATWA.
I understand [I could be wrong] the situation is about to get worse, but that would need checking.
For one moment there I thought I read “…The Age’s man site.”
This is terrible, and well done to the Age for publishing something, at least.
What a shame that we’re more interested in animal rights than human rights. *sigh*
Actually the story is wrong and the journo must be a fool.
And so must the lawyer.
Domestic violence has been upheld twice by the high court as grounds for protection going back to a Pakistani case called Khawar in 2002 and another joint case of two Iranian women I know in 2004.
And it is covered under the complementary protection laws passed last year.
We can be interested in and concerned with both at the same time, of course.
A typical Age story…
The paper pushes a progressive line (which I agree with).
What can we do about the issues raised? Of course the answer lies with what our politicians do.
So what is the view of our politicians? All The Age tells us is “While the government is yet to respond to the Australian Law Reform Commission’s recommendations, or even to say when it will respond, sources within the department have told The Age that there’s an active desire to fix the complexities that make it difficult to help women on temporary visas.”
I would like to get a better response from Labor on what they intend to do rather than the wishy-washy response reported. But as the fix to this problem is political, where is the view of Liberal and Green?
Of course a quote from The Greens would prove that The Greens are the only party who think that this issue is a disgrace and should be fixed.
But as per Age ‘policy’, the article leaves it’s readers feeling impotent and hoping that Labor fixes this issue.