‘I felt less human, not human at all’: Australia faces moral crossroads over Nauru
Share:
Who is accountable for what happens in an offshore processing centre? It’s remarkable this is still a question in Australia. Aarash lost his youth to offshore processing. Sixteen when he was sent to Nauru, he says he cannot remember a single birthday in more than a decade.
![[A refugee settlement on Nauru in 2018]](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/b7bd735935524cbd6b83ae4ea52bc35ea3809c1f/320_11_4952_2972/master/4952.jpg?width=445&dpr=1&s=none&crop=none)
“When I see younger ones that age, having fun, playing, going to school, it reminds me of everything I lost,” he says. “I felt less human, not human at all.”. But who is responsible? Who is accountable for what happens in an offshore processing centre?.
That this is still a question, after nearly a quarter of a century of Australian offshore practice, is remarkable. Refugees, advocates, lawyers and a growing body of international law insist that Australia’s offshore processing system – whatever occurs within it and to those restrained by it – remains the responsibility of Australia.
For decades they have consistently argued that Australia can’t “outsource” its responsibilities towards those who arrive on its shores seeking protection, to those it is legally obliged to protect. And in two landmark decisions published on Friday, the UN human rights committee spelled out that argument yet again.
“Where there is power or effective control, there is responsibility,” committee member Mahjoub El Haiba wrote. “The outsourcing of operations does not absolve states of accountability. Offshore detention facilities are not human-rights free zones.”.
