Sparky wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:14pm:



No, saying "I seek asylum" determines that.

The illegal immigrants who come by plane don't say "I seek asylum".

They hide in the community and get jobs.  They avoid the authorities at all costs.

Asylum seekers, on the other hand, present themselves to authorities and say "Hey buddy, can you help us - we're seeking asylum".

This is all very basic stuff.

Not sure why you're having trouble understanding it.

Sparky wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:24pm:



No.

Settle for a minute, and listen.  You're getting yourself all confused.

The people who come by plane aren't "reffos".  They aren't claiming asylum.  That's not my opinion, by the way, it's what they actually say.  They overstay their visas and then try to blend in with the community.  They aren't saying that they are fleeing persecution or war.

In order to become a refugee, one must be seeking asylum.

The people who come by plane are seeking houses and jobs, not asylum.

Boat people, however, are seeking asylum.i

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:32pm:



"Until recently, the vast majority of asylum seekers applying for protection in Australia arrived originally by air with a valid visa and then applied for asylum at a later date while living in the community.

Quote:


The convention was written with mainly Europe in mind where refugees crossed borders via land routes.

In Australia's case (an island), you're only entering the country illegally if you're on land that's considered Australian territory and you've bypassed the whole customs/immigration process. You're an illegal arrival if you do that.

At sea it's a different matter. You can legally pass through Australian waters without the required docs (passport, visa etc). If you happen across or call up an Australian naval or customs vessel and decide you want to seek asylum and you're happy to put yourself under their care for the trip to shore, then you're not entering Australia illegally.

It's only illegal if you've got your feet on solid ground (i.e. you've entered Australia) and you've bypassed customs and immigration (the exception being DMZs at international airports). Just being in Australian waters doesn't count as far as the definition for illegal entry goes.

Quote:


The convention was written with mainly Europe in mind where refugees crossed borders via land routes.

In Australia's case (an island), you're only entering the country illegally if you're on land that's considered Australian territory and you've bypassed the whole customs/immigration process. You're an illegal arrival if you do that.

At sea it's a different matter. You can legally pass through Australian waters without the required docs (passport, visa etc). If you happen across or call up an Australian naval or customs vessel and decide you want to seek asylum and you're happy to put yourself under their care for the trip to shore, then you're not entering Australia illegally.

It's only illegal if you've got your feet on solid ground (i.e. you've entered Australia) and you've bypassed customs and immigration (the exception being DMZs at international airports). Just being in Australian waters doesn't count as far as the definition for illegal entry goes.

Soren wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 7:47am:


You need a valid visa to step onto a plane.  The Australian Government will not issue one to anybody who looks like they're going to claim Asylum.   So, it becomes a catch-22 situation.  You can't fly here to claim Asylum with a visa, you cannot get a visa, if you're likely to claim Asylum.  The only other way to get here is by boat and so the Australian government is actually creating the market for the people smugglers.