(1) Under what law would Australia's government (as separate from its people - snuckle - now there's a rub) be prosecuted for cruel treatment of asylum seekers?
That would be the International Human Rights Law. UN Treaties. International Criminal Court oversea and enforce these laws
For Crimes Against Humanity? That actually might wash if someone had the balls to put it up there... I'm sure Geoffrey Robertson would make a case at The Hague... hypothetically speaking.....
As Grigor said - a convention is not a Law and is not enforceable other than in conscience - and again - there's a rub with this government...
It seems gentlemen's agreements are anything but.. and once again - there's a rub in many ways and places here today....
The Laws and Treaty I cited above are enforceable. Many have been prosecuted by it
(2) Ah, yes - but can we equally say that an asylum seeker is ENCOURAGED to continue his/her application when placed under the pressures that currently exist? An application is, after all, only an application and is pending proof or acceptance of its genuine nature..... why then is so much effort expended in trying to get applicants to withdraw their application before the proof is put to the test?
So now there theory is they are co-erced into continuing with the application. Bogeyman under the bed. If so then they are no longer asylum seeking.