Editing Pacific Solution (section)

==Implementation (2001–2007)==
[[File:Boat People Arrivals vs Afghan Returnees.PNG|thumb|400px|alt=Afghan refugees returning to Afghanistan worldwide 1994–2011 vs boat people arriving in Australia 1994–2012|Afghan refugees returning to Afghanistan worldwide 1994–2011<ref name="unh"/> versus boat people arriving in Australia 1994–2012<ref name="par">{{cite web |url=http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/5P1X6/upload_binary/5P1X6.pdf |title=Boat arrivals in Australia since 1976 |author=Janet Phillips & Harriet Spinks |date=23 July 2013 |work=Research Paper |publisher=Parliament of Australia |access-date=25 August 2013 |archive-date=14 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814145603/https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/5P1X6/upload_binary/5P1X6.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>]]
The Australian Government passed legislation on 27 September 2001, with amendments to the Commonwealth ''[[Migration Act 1958]]'',<ref>{{cite web|title=Human Rights Law Bulletin Volume 2|url=http://www.humanrights.gov.au/human-rights-law-bulletin-volume-2|work=On 26 and 27 September 2001 the Commonwealth parliament passed migration legislation|publisher=Australian Human Rights Commission|access-date=11 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140203071656/http://www.humanrights.gov.au/human-rights-law-bulletin-volume-2|archive-date=3 February 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref> enacted by the ''[[Migration Legislation Amendment (Excision from the Migration Zone) (Consequential Provisions) Act 2001]]''. Specifically, the new amendment to the 1958 Act allowed "offshore entry persons" to be taken to "declared countries", with Nauru and Papua New Guinea made "declared countries" under the Act.<ref name=parlrep2002>{{cite report | title=Select Committee for an inquiry into a certain maritime incident. Report | chapter=Chapter 10: Pacific Solution: Negotiations and Agreements (10.73) | website=[[Parliament of Australia]] | date=23 October 2002 | chapter-url=https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/senate/former_committees/maritimeincident/report/c10 | access-date=27 February 2021  | archive-date=27 February 2021 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210227054838/https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/senate/former_committees/maritimeincident/report/c10 | url-status=live }}</ref> The implementation of this legislation became known as the Pacific Solution<ref>{{cite web|title=What was the 'Pacific Solution'?|url=http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/PacificSolution#_Toc334509636|work=the Howard Government introduced what came to be known as the 'Pacific Solution'|publisher=Parliament of Australia|access-date=11 June 2013|archive-date=14 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814123059/https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/PacificSolution#_Toc334509636|url-status=live}}</ref> at the same time as or soon after the passing of the legislation (at least within a year).<ref name=parlrep2002/>

By redefining the area of Australian territory that could be landed upon and then legitimately used for claims of asylum (the migration zone), and by removing any intercepted people to third countries for processing, the aim was to deter future asylum seekers from making the dangerous journey by boat, once they knew that their trip would probably not end with a legitimate claim for [[asylum in Australia]].<ref>{{cite news |author=UNHCR |url=http://www.unhcr.org/47ac3f9c14.html |title=Welcomes close of Australia's Pacific Solution |newspaper=Unhcr |publisher=United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees |access-date=22 November 2012 |archive-date=14 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814122817/https://www.unhcr.org/47ac3f9c14.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

On 28 October 2001, at his 2001 election campaign policy launch, Prime Minister [[John Howard]] said "we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come",<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2001/s422692.htm |title=Liberals accused of trying to rewrite history . Australian Broadcasting Corp |publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation |date=21 November 2001 |access-date=22 November 2012 |archive-date=31 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170831001858/http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2001/s422692.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> in an effort to build support for the policy.

Asylum seekers were intercepted at sea while sailing from [[Indonesia]] and moved using Australian naval vessels. Detention centres were set up on [[Christmas Island]], [[Manus Island]] in Papua New Guinea, and on the island nation of [[Nauru detention centre|Nauru]]. Some were also accepted for processing by [[New Zealand]]. Most of the asylum seekers came from [[Afghanistan]] (largely of the [[Hazara people|Hazara ethnic group]]), [[Iraq]], [[Iran]], China, and [[Vietnam]]. The last asylum seekers to be detained on Nauru before the end of the policy had come from [[Sri Lanka]] and [[Myanmar]].<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6453187.stm Sri Lankans to be sent to Nauru] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180713194832/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6453187.stm |date=13 July 2018 }}". [[BBC]], 15 March 2007</ref>

Arrivals dropped from a total of 5516 people in 2001 to one arrival in 2002 after implementation of the policy, and remained below 150 annually until 2008.<ref>{{cite web|title=Boat arrivals in Australia since 1976|url=http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/BoatArrivals|publisher=Parliament of Australia|access-date=26 July 2013|archive-date=14 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814123132/https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/BoatArrivals|url-status=live}}</ref> The removal of the [[Taliban]] from power in Afghanistan may have had some effect in this decrease,<ref name="unh">{{cite web|url= http://www.unhcr.org/pages/4a02afce6.html|title= UNHCR Statistical Yearbooks 1994–2011|access-date= 25 August 2013|archive-date= 21 September 2013|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130921222750/http://www.unhcr.org/pages/4a02afce6.html|url-status= live}}</ref> as nearly six million Afghans had returned to Afghanistan since 2002, almost a quarter of the country's population at the time.<ref>{{cite web|title=Speech by H.E Dr. Jamaher Anwary, Minister of Refugees and Repatriation, Afghanistan, to the International Conference on the Solutions Strategy for Afghan Refugees to Support Voluntary Repatriation, Sustainable Reintegration and Assistance to Host Countries, Geneva, 2 May. 2012|url=http://www.unhcr.org/4fa11f886.pdf|publisher=UNHCR|access-date=25 August 2013|archive-date=14 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814150542/https://www.unhcr.org/4fa11f886.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

Four boats were successfully returned to Indonesian waters out of the twelve [[Suspected Illegal Entry Vessel]]s (SIEVs) intercepted by the Navy during [[Operation Relex]] during 2001–2002, having made 10 attempts to enforce the policy, based on judgements of whether it was safe to do so or not. Three men allegedly drowned trying to swim back to shore after returning to Indonesia.<ref name="cri">{{cite web|first=Amber|last=Jamieson|title=The consequences of turning boats back: SIEV towback cases|url=http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/11/07/the-consequences-of-turning-boats-back-siev-towback-cases/|publisher=Crikey.com.au|date=7 November 2011|access-date=26 August 2013|archive-date=14 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814123147/https://www.crikey.com.au/2011/11/07/the-consequences-of-turning-boats-back-siev-towback-cases/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In November 2003, a boat carrying 53 passengers was successfully deterred, and in March 2004, Customs returned a boat with 15 people after interception at the [[Ashmore Islands]].<ref name="cri" />

The success rate was 36 per cent of boats, or 31 per cent of asylum seekers sent back to Indonesia.<ref>{{cite web|first=Malcolm|last=Farr|title=Turning back the boats? We should listen to the Navy|url=http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/turning-back-the-boats-we-should-listen-to-the-navy/|publisher=The Punch|access-date=26 August 2013|archive-date=11 September 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120911052505/http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/turning-back-the-boats-we-should-listen-to-the-navy/|url-status=live}}</ref> Details of operations from 2005 to 2008 are scant. [[Operation Resolute]] began in July 2006, run jointly by the [[Australian Customs and Border Protection Service]] and the [[Australian Defence Force]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Operation RESOLUTE|url=http://www.defence.gov.au/opEx/global/opresolute/index.htm|publisher=Department of Defence|access-date=26 August 2013|archive-date=12 October 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091012153722/http://www.defence.gov.au/opEx/global/opresolute/index.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>

During the Pacific Solution period, mainland detention centres were closed at Baxter, [[Woomera Immigration Reception and Processing Centre|Woomera]] and Curtin.<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/04/11/1018333391993.html | location=Melbourne | work=The Age | title=Detention centres to be scaled down | date=11 April 2002 | access-date=20 October 2009 | archive-date=13 July 2018 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180713194517/https://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/04/11/1018333391993.html | url-status=live }}</ref> A lower level of boat arrivals continued throughout the Pacific Solution period, although it was reported to have peaked in 2012, since the abolition of the policy, despite worldwide asylum claim numbers remaining low by historical standards.<ref>{{cite web|title=UNHCR Asylum Trends 2012|url=http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/files/2012_Asylum_Trends.pdf|access-date=17 September 2013|url-status=dead|archive-date=21 March 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150321065057/http://unhcr.org.au/unhcr/files/2012_Asylum_Trends.pdf}}</ref> These arrivals also corresponded with increasing numbers of new refugee arrivals in Indonesia after the abandonment of the policy: 385 in 2008, 3,230 in 2009, 3,905 in 2010, 4,052 in 2011, 7,218 in 2012 and 8,332 in 2013.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.unhcr.org/50001bda9.html|title=UNHCR – Indonesia Fact Sheet|author=United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees|work=UNHCR|date=16 Feb 2016|access-date=11 May 2014|archive-date=14 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200814150540/https://www.unhcr.org/50001bda9.html|url-status=live}}</ref> A probable link between restrictive refugee policies and lower attempts at seeking asylum in Australia by boat have been confirmed by the UNHCR: in April 2014, UNHCR Indonesia representative Manual Jordao stated: "Word that the prospects of reaching Australia by boat from Indonesia are now virtually zero appears to have reached smugglers and would-be asylum seekers in countries of origin such as Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and Myanmar. The numbers registering with the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Indonesia have dropped from about 100 a day during 2013 to about 100 a week now."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irinnews.org/report/99908/asylum-seekers-stranded-in-indonesia|title=Asylum seekers left high and dry in Indonesia|agency=IRIN|access-date=11 May 2014|archive-date=2 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402130402/http://www.irinnews.org/report/99908/asylum-seekers-stranded-in-indonesia|url-status=live}}</ref>

The number of asylum seekers assessed as genuine refugees via the Pacific Solution process was lower than for onshore processing.{{Citation needed|date=June 2013}} 68 per cent of the asylum seekers were deemed genuine refugees and less than 40 per cent of asylum seekers sent to Nauru received resettlement in Australia.{{Citation needed|date=June 2013}} A 2006 report by the [[Australian Human Rights Commission]] showed that of the 1509 asylum seekers sent to Nauru by that time, 586 were granted Australian resettlement (39%), 360 resettled in New Zealand (24%), 19 resettled in Sweden (1.2%), 10 in Canada (<1%) and 4 in Norway (<1%). A total of 482 asylum seekers (32%) were deemed not genuine refugees and sent home.<ref name=AHRC>{{cite web|last=AHRC|title=MIGRATION AMENDMENT (DESIGNATED UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS) BILL 2006|url=http://www.hreoc.gov.au/legal/submissions/migration20060522.html|publisher=AHRC|access-date=23 July 2012|archive-date=14 October 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121014124405/http://hreoc.gov.au/legal/submissions/migration20060522.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

The cost of the Pacific Solution between 2001 and 2007 was at least {{AUD|1 billion}}.<ref>{{cite web|title=a price too high: the cost of Australia's approach to asylum seekers|url=http://resources.oxfam.org.au/filestore/originals/OAus-PriceTooHighAsylumSeekers-0807.pdf|work=Financial costs of offshore processing|publisher=A Just Australia, Oxfam Australia and Oxfam Novib|access-date=11 June 2013|archive-date=19 August 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160819044716/http://resources.oxfam.org.au/filestore/originals/OAus-PriceTooHighAsylumSeekers-0807.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/04/17/asylum-seekers-the-facts-in-figures/ |title=Asylum seekers, the facts in figures |publisher=Crikey.com.au |date=17 April 2009 |access-date=22 November 2012 |archive-date=13 April 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130413010846/http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/04/17/asylum-seekers-the-facts-in-figures |url-status=live }}</ref>

[[Amnesty International]], refugee rights groups and other [[Non-governmental organization|non-governmental organisations]] said that Australia was failing to meet its international obligations. The ad hoc nature in which the policy evolved was also criticised, as it resulted in people being moved to [[Manus Island]] and Nauru before facilities were ready. Poor facilities and services including intermittent electricity and fresh water, poor medical facilities and the serious mental impact of detention on people in these conditions without the certainty of being granted refugee status were also strongly criticised.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://info.humanrights.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/Nauru-report-12Sept2012.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=17 October 2012 |archive-date=27 January 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140127110117/http://info.humanrights.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/Nauru-report-12Sept2012.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>