Asher Hirsch

Monash University, Faculty of Law, Graduate Student

Followers

152

Following

Co-authors

Public Views

Senior Policy Officer, Refugee Council of Australia; PhD Candidate, Monash University Faulty of Law.
Supervisors: Dr Azadeh Dastyari, Dr Maria O'Sullivan, and Dr Antje Missbach

less

Josiah Heyman

University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP)

Daniela DeBono

University of Malta

Heath Cabot

University of Bergen

Nando Sigona

University of Birmingham

Eduardo Domenech

Universidad Nacional de Córdoba

Mauro Grondona

University of Genova

David Moffette

University of Ottawa | Université d'Ottawa

Rafael Domingo Osle

University of Navarra

Ken Pennington

The Catholic University of America

Ana Rita Gil, PhD

Universidade de Lisboa

InterestsView All (13)

Uploads

Papers by Asher Hirsch

Norm-busting: rightist challenges in US and Australian immigration and refugee policies

Third World Quarterly, 2021

Institutionalist scholars argue that international rights norms, judicial autonomy and discourses... more Institutionalist scholars argue that international rights norms, judicial autonomy and discourses of immigrant nationhood constrain shifts to harsher immigration policies in liberal democracies, particularly settler societies. The Trump presidency and the Liberal-National Coalition government in Australia during the same period are occasions to test whether those norms functioned as expected in two paradigmatic country cases. Both governments attempted to undermine judicial autonomy, the illegitimacy of ethnic and religious selection of immigrants, the rights of detained children and families, and the principle of non-refoulement. A new institutionalist analysis of attempted norm-busting in each country specifies which norms were effective constraints. International legal and political constraints were weak. Domestically, norms obliging the protection of children were more effective than norms related to adults. Discourses favouring immigrant nationhood and opposing discrimination resonated, but were confronted by equally powerful discourses of insular nationalism and security that promoted restriction. While the judiciary moderately constrained new policies, particularly in the US, in neither country did the judiciary fully act in line with dominant theoretical expectations, because of both structural and normative weaknesses.

Australia’s Private Refugee Sponsorship Program: Creating Complementary Pathways Or Privatising Humanitarianism?

Refugee Sponsorship: Lessons learned, ways forward, 2019

This article provides the first history and critique of Australia’s private refugee sponsorship p... more This article provides the first history and critique of Australia’s private refugee sponsorship program, the Community Support Program (CSP). As more countries turn to community sponsorship of refugees as a means to fill the “resettlement gap,” Australia’s model provides a cautionary tale. The CSP, introduced in 2017, does not expand Australia’s overall resettlement commitment but instead takes places from within the existing humanitarian resettlement program. The Australian program charges sponsors exorbitant application fees, while simultaneously prioritizing refugees who are “job ready,” with English-language skills and ability to integrate quickly, undermining the principle of resettling the most vulnerable. As such, we argue that the CSP hijacks places from within Australia’s humanitarian program and represents a market-driven outsourcing and privatization of Australia’s refugee resettlement priorities and commitments.

Download

Outsourcing control: the International Organization for Migration in Indonesia

The International Journal of Human Rights, 2018

ABSTRACT The International Organization for Migration (IOM) receives considerable funding from th... more ABSTRACT The International Organization for Migration (IOM) receives considerable funding from the Australian government to undertake a variety of migration control operations in Indonesia. In this article, we highlight how the IOM’s migration management operations aim to target asylum seekers, control their movement, and prevent their arrival on Australian shores. IOM Indonesia’s approach involves the detention of irregular migrants, the return of asylum seekers and refugees to their countries of origin, the strengthening of Indonesia’s border controls, and public information campaigns to dissuade people from taking boats to Australia to seek asylum. We argue that these tactics frequently compromise the rights of asylum seekers and refugees in Indonesia by prioritising Australia’s geopolitical deterrence agenda. Such activities present a contradiction with the IOM’s closer relationship with the United Nations since 2016, which we critique as ‘blue-washing’: creating the impression of a humanitarian organisation while simultaneously carrying out migration control activities on behalf of donor states of the global north. We draw upon financial records, freedom of information requests and previous scholarship on asylum seekers in Indonesia to critique the IOM’s activities across Indonesia.

The Borders Beyond the Border: Australia’s Extraterritorial Migration Controls

Refugee Survey Quarterly, 2017

This article explores Australia’s extraterritorial non-entrée policies, which are designed to pre... more This article explores Australia’s extraterritorial non-entrée policies, which are designed to prevent the irregular arrival of refugees and keep refugees in countries of origin and first asylum. In an age of securitisation, many States have attempted to restrict access to asylum through a range of extraterritorial measures that seek to prevent refugees from reaching territorial borders in order to claim protection. The first part of this article outlines Australia’s unilateral non-entrée policies, including visa requirements, carrier sanctions, airline liaison officers, surveillance technologies, interception at sea, and the excising of Australian territory. The second half of this article explores the emergence of co-operative non-entrée policies, which have seen Australia enter into agreements with its regional neighbours to deter, detain, and deport would-be asylum-seekers. Together, these extraterritorial non-entrée policies see Australia’s regional neighbours take on the responsibility of border control on behalf of Australia, making it increasingly difficult for refugees to reach Australian territory in order to seek protection.

The right to refuse: The Victorian Mental Health Act 2014 and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Alternative Law Journal, 2017

This article considers how the Victorian Mental Health Act 2014 extinguishes the right of people ... more This article considers how the Victorian Mental Health Act 2014 extinguishes the right of people with a mental illness to refuse treatment in light of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which prohibits detention or compulsory treatment on the basis of a person’s disability. Three possible resolutions of this inconsistency are proposed and considered: repealing the Mental Health Act 2014, de-linking disability from compulsory treatment, and maintaining legal capacity by supporting mental capacity.

Rethinking resettlement and family reunion in Australia

Alternative Law Journal, 2017

Family reunion remains a significant issue for refugee communities in Australia. Family separatio... more Family reunion remains a significant issue for refugee communities in Australia. Family separation causes significant psychological, social and economic harm to displaced communities. Instead of supporting the reunion of refugee families, the current law and policies make it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, for refugees to bring their family members to Australia. This article outlines the barriers to family reunion for refugees under Australian law and policy and addresses how such policies could be reformed to better facilitate reunification.

Download

Assessing Refugee Protection Claims at Australian Airports: The Gap Between Law, Policy, and Practice

SSRN Electronic Journal

Australia’s current approach to processing individuals who arrive by air and raise protection cla... more Australia’s current approach to processing individuals who arrive by air and raise protection claims at or before immigration clearance at Australian airports has not been previously explored. This article reveals a set of policy and procedural instructions, recently released by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth), which establishes the administrative process of ‘entry screening’. The article examines entry screening within the transnational framework governing Australia’s legal obligations towards individuals seeking international protection. While much scholarly and public attention has been directed towards policies such as offshore detention and interdiction at sea, the documents reveal that policies designed to deter ‘unauthorised maritime arrivals’ have similar manifestations — and consequences — for ‘unauthorised air arrivals’. The article then turns to an analysis of domestic law, arguing that the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) does not authorise the entry screening procedures and that the procedures contradict certain statutory guarantees and procedural fairness. The documents further indicate that DHA lacks accurate data on protection claims made in Australian airports. Finally, the article examines why the current practice of entry screening violates Australia’s international legal obligations of non-refoulement and non-penalisation.

Community members should be able to sponsor refugees for the right reasons, not to save the government money

Education Denied: People Seeking Asylum and Refugees Trapped in Limbo

PSN: Education (Topic), 2016

Since 2012, the processing of refugee claims for those who arrived by boat have been effectively ... more Since 2012, the processing of refugee claims for those who arrived by boat have been effectively frozen, leaving thousands of people in indefinite limbo. These people are effectively excluded from accessing higher education by current government policy. This paper gives voice to six people who have been excluded from accessing higher education in Australia because they came here by boat. Using data collected by the Refugee Council of Australia, this paper explores and presents how these people were excluded from education, how they were determined to get education, and their desire to give back to the Australian community. It concludes by recommending that the current policy be changed to allow access to higher education for people in this situation.

Private Humanitarian Sponsorship in Australia: Searching for the Community in Australia's Community Refugee Sponsorship Program

Beyond the silos: Towards transformative social work practice with people from refugee backgrounds living with a disability

The changing face of disability and refugee services and policy in Australia: Implications for social work

People in Australia living with disabilities who are also from refugee backgrounds, or who are se... more People in Australia living with disabilities who are also from refugee backgrounds, or who are seeking asylum, face enormous challenges. In addition to the traumatic histories they bring with them, the shifting political and policy landscapes have resulted in a fractured and disintegrated service response, with changes to immigration policy and the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme set to exacerbate existing issues in the system. This paper outlines the shifting policy contexts and presents findings of a consultation process undertaken by the Refugee Council of Australia.

Barriers to education for people seeking asylum and refugees on temporary visas

Ineligibility for higher education financing programs 4 Limited access to income support 5 Specif... more Ineligibility for higher education financing programs 4 Limited access to income support 5 Specific implications for refugees on SHEVs 5 Access to English language classes 6 Enrolment into secondary school for older young people 6 Financial, social and other support 7 Access to apprenticeships 9 Benefits of addressing barriers to education 9 Summary of recommendations 10 Cover photo: Haseena, nine years old, left, and Nadia, twelve years old. The sisters are the second generation of Afghan refugee girls to attend the school in Pakistan run by 2015 Nansen Refugee Award winner Aqeela Asifi. Their mother, Salma, was among the first girl students two decades ago.

Download

After the boats have stopped: refugees stranded in Indonesia and Australia’s containment policies

Delays in citizenship applications for permanent refugee visa holders

Citizenship provides refugees with a sense of meaningful security and protection, and better enab... more Citizenship provides refugees with a sense of meaningful security and protection, and better enables them to sponsor family members for Australian visas and travel to visit family. This research raises serious questions about discrimination in access to citizenship for refugees who came by boat to Australia.

Systemic policy barriers to meaningful participation of students from refugee and asylum seeking backgrounds in Australian higher education: Neoliberal settlement and language policies and (deliberate?) challenges for meaningful participation

Educational Policies and Practices of English-Speaking Refugee Resettlement Countries, 2019

Australia’s Extraterritorial Border Control Policies

Social Workers as Collaborators? The Ethics of Working Within Australia’s Asylum System

Ethics and Social Welfare, 2017

Social workers working within the Australian asylum seeker processing system, particularly offsho... more Social workers working within the Australian asylum seeker processing system, particularly offshore on Nauru and Manus Island, risk being collaborators in the systemic abuse of men, women and children who seek asylum in Australia. In order to avoid accusations of collaboration, social workers must work to end this abuse. However, the current policy environment makes this very difficult, with social workers who resist the status quo risking unemployment, public shaming and imprisonment. Using freedom of information disclosures, whistleblower testimony, leaked documents, parliamentary records, case law, media reports and academic literature, this paper examines this difficult position. Alternatives to retreating from the system are proposed, including advocacy through whistleblowing, policy reform and litigation, or subversive action from within. Social workers are encouraged to act in whatever ways they can, within the ethical, legal and practical limitations which are imposed.

Social Workers as Collaborators? The Ethics of Working Within Australia’s Asylum System

Ethics and Social Welfare, 2017

Assessing Refugee Protection Claims at Australian Airports: The Gap Between Law, Policy, and Practice

by Asher Hirsch and Regina Jefferies

Melbourne University Law Review, 2020

Australia's current approach to processing individuals who arrive by air and raise protection cla... more Australia's current approach to processing individuals who arrive by air and raise protection claims at or before immigration clearance at Australian airports has not been previously explored. This article reveals a set of policy and procedural instructions, recently released by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth), which establishes the administrative process of 'entry screening'. The article examines entry screening within the transnational framework governing Australia's legal obligations towards individuals seeking international protection. While much scholarly and public attention has been directed towards policies such as offshore detention and in-terdiction at sea, the documents reveal that policies designed to deter 'unauthorised maritime arrivals' have similar manifestations-and consequences-for 'unauthorised air arrivals'. The article then turns to an analysis of domestic law, arguing that the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) does not authorise the entry screening procedures and that the procedures contradict certain statutory guarantees and procedural fairness. The documents further indicate that DHA lacks accurate data on protection claims made in Australian airports. Finally, the article examines why the current practice of entry screening violates Australia's international legal obligations of non-refoulement and non-penalisation.

Download

Norm-busting: rightist challenges in US and Australian immigration and refugee policies

Third World Quarterly, 2021