The Pacific island nation could seek returning refugees from the NZYQ cohort to their home countries, as stated by the Nauruan president in a recently translated discussion from February.
The discussion has fueled months-long debate, with inaccurate assertions that those sent to Nauru were not asylum seekers and might be sent back to their home nations where feasible.
Refugee Status Verified
It has been confirmed that individuals of the NZYQ group have had their asylum applications approved by Australian authorities. Some of the men already transferred to Nauru are among those who are asylum seekers.
A partial transcript of the president's remarks was previously reported, and the full transcript was read into Hansard by senators late Monday.
Translation Dispute
The interpreted text used was not the Australian government’s document, but externally verified interpretation acquired by a refugee support organization.
Authorities has repeatedly opposed release of its interpretation of the discussion, even securing a gag order in the judicial system.
Answering a official request to produce the official translation, the top diplomat stated that its disclosure would “prejudice diplomatic standing … and our wider reputation in the Pacific.”
Involuntary Transfers and Legal Obligations
Five or more members of the NZYQ cohort have been sent to Nauru and are being held at a offshore center on the island nation.
The government is required under international law to safeguard asylum seekers under the UN agreement and cannot return them to their home country where they face a “well-founded fear of being persecuted.”
Should that removal is made through a third country – such as Nauru – it is unlawful, known in global legal standards as “successive returns.”
Nauru is bound to the treaty.
President's Remarks
Adeang gave the discussion in winter, using the local language to a employee, and detailing the recent deal the island had signed with the Australian government to host members of the designated group.
This agreement will see the government pay Nauru as much as $2.5 billion over the next thirty years.
Adeang claimed those removed to Nauru by authorities would stay on the island for 30 years.
“However, we, your government, discover a method for them to move around, for example; they are able to return,” he said. “Currently, the issue is unable to deport them, these people are what you would describe as without citizenship. “The nations they left do not want them and they do not have a way to go home. And if over time we find a way to return them home then obviously they will not complete the 30 years, but the permit we are granting to begin is 30 years.”
Sources indicate not one of the men transferred under the arrangement currently are without citizenship.
Erroneous Statements
The president incorrectly claimed – falsely – that individuals of the NZYQ cohort were not asylum seekers.
“To clarify, these people are not asylum seekers. They are common citizens but their past is that they have been to jail. “Currently, they are at liberty around the country and while they are not currently penalized but they are not from there and regardless of official intent to return them, they are unable to.”
Group Details
The NZYQ cohort is a collection of over 350 non-citizens released from custody in Australia after a high court ruling in late 2023.
Residency permits had been revoked on “personal conduct”, the majority as a due to a prior crime. Most have served a jail term but cannot be returned to their countries of origin because they are threatened there. Some have lived in Australia for many years and have relatives with citizenship.
Legal and Ethical Objections
A lawmaker stated in parliament that the assertion that the NZYQ cohort were not asylum seekers was “obviously false.”
“Could authorities have misled them? Did … our government mislead the island's authorities? Do they adhere to what the leader said about these people not being refugees? None of them refugees? “Officials may be ashamed by the fact that President Adeang has made it explicit he desires their deportation from the place of origin. We know that they have escaped harm generally.”
A senior advocate at a human rights center said the lack of transparency around its external processing was “very concerning.”
He said the secrecy and cover-ups damaged confidence, and misconduct prospered in the secrecy of the third-country program.
“The transcript shows that the island aims to return refugees to their countries of origin ‘should a method be found’, despite the fact that these are individuals the government has not deported to their country of origin because they are asylum seekers. This means the authorities has practically transferred refoulement – compensating a third nation to do what Australia legally cannot.”
He said the president's remarks – the disclosure of which was resisted by the authorities – revealed a risky gap.
“Australia asserts it follows international law while discreetly compensating for individuals to be sent back to harm via external agreements.”
A senior lawyer of a human rights organization said the government had tried to hide “the majority of information” of its agreement with Nauru.
“Now we learn that the island's authorities could be unwilling of meeting its obligations of this lamentable deal.”
She said the deportations to Nauru must be ceased, because the authorities cannot ensure refugees' protection.
“Authorities is forcibly removing individuals from their social networks in Australia and banishing them to a place where they are unaccepted. Officials has known all along that it risks dispatching people to their fatal harm – through lack of healthcare they need to survive, or by forcing them back to the nations they left due to persecution.”
Questions have been submitted to the relevant departments and the Nauruan government.
