They may have been asylum seeker when they crossed the border of their home countries and arrived in the first safe country. But when they leave the countries where they are not threatened illegally and then try to enter another country, Australia,  also illegally, then they are 'illegal maritime arrivals' and illegal immigrants who seek not asylum but permanent settlement under the guise of being asylum seekers.

When TPVs were introduced by Howard, they rioted because nothing less than permanent settlement will suit them. Asylum is not enough, it is not what they re seeking.

Soren wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2014 at 8:40pm:



"For the purposes of this Act, a person is an unauthorised maritime arrival if ... "

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2013C00679/Html/Volume_1#_Toc371587518

Migration Act 1958, 23 November 2013 (Current)

NorthOfNorth wrote on Jan 22^nd, 2014 at 10:51pm:


There is assurance of enduring security and safety from what they fled. There is, in other words, assured asylum. What there isn't (any more and should never have been expected as a matter of entitlement) is assured migration outcome, that is, permanent settlement. 

These are different although neighbouring concept and this is why, whaddayaknow, we even have two different words for them: asylum and migration.

The refugees sitting in camps are asylum seekers who have been granted asylum. Now they are waiting for the next step, a completely different and separate step, re-settlement in a country that will take them.

The boat people want to fuse the two things into one and sail straight to the final settlement outcome.

They are not so much asylum seekers but migration seekers. This is why they are seen as queue jumpers.

Soren wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2014 at 8:33am:

Actually there is not the assurance of enduring security and safety from what they fled as Indonesia is not a signatory to the refugee convention so the risk of refoulement is a threat in Indonesia.

Indonesia generally may not actively expel asylum seekers, but it usually does little to determine the authenticity of refugees' claims of persecution, leaving them in legal limbo in camps in conditions that would be intolerable in places like Australia.

The perception in countries like Indonesia is that, while Australia is prepared to support and partake in wars that cause these mass migrations of persecuted peoples (e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan), it is hardly affected (relative to nations like Indonesia) by the blowback of mass migrations. What Indonesians perceive of Australia (regarding irregular arrivals by boat of asylum seekers) is irrational hysteria over what is a fraction of the problem that Indonesia faces.