To celebrate the 50th anniversary of independence in Papua New Guinea, for the month of September Australian Policy and History is publishing policy briefs written by students studying at Honours, Masters or Doctoral levels who attended a June 2025 intensive workshop on Papua New Guinea and Australia, sponsored by DFAT and run by Deakin’s Centre for Contemporary Histories, at the National Portrait Gallery in Canberra.

Attention:

David Pocock, Independent Senator for the ACT

Mehreen Faruqi, Greens Senator for NSW

Linda Thorpe, Independent Senator for VIC

Purpose:

Addressing the Financial and Humanitarian Failure of Australia’s Offshore Detention Crisis – Urgent Legal Imperatives

Executive Summary

Australia’s offshore detention system remains a humanitarian disaster. Recent laws permit re-detention, along with deportation to third countries, without safeguards and in violation of international law.  More than 100 newly detained refugees are in Nauru as of April 2025, with more people to be transferred, while 39 refugees are stranded in PNG. Despite spending $13B since 2012 (including $604.4M in 2024-25), the policy has resulted in deaths, medical neglect and abuse. These figures do not include the $408M soon to be provided to Nauru, with an additional $70M per year for 30 years, which is greater than the budget for the Australian Human Rights Commission. DHA’s claims that procedural fairness had been applied regarding the process of the NZYQ member cohort at the recent Senate committee hearing in the first week of September 2025 are obsolete. The move to deport these people to Nauru changes the circumstances in which this cohort resides. Assessment processes need to consider this change to meet reasonable standards of procedural fairness (Talbot 2025).

The Problem

  1. Health Crisis and Humanitarian Catastrophe
  • Nauru: 65% of detainees report physical health conditions; 22% suffer severe mental illness (2024 Health Paper).
  • PNG: 100% of refugees have physical health conditions; 40% are chronically suicidal (2024 Health Paper). Reports reveal that refugees in PNG are stealing food to survive after support payments ceased (Senate Estimates 2024).

Case Studies

  • Arbitrary Cruelty: Refugees such as Zohreh Mirzaei, a woman who fled torture in Iran, and was detained on Nauru for 3.5 years, while others on the same boat received Temporary Protection Visas in Australia (ASRC 2023).
  • Forcible Returns: Over 780 refugees were returned to countries they fled, some of whom faced persecution or death, like Son Phan, a man killed in Vietnam post-deportation (ASRC 2023).

 

  1. Corruption, Human Rights Abuses and Financial Waste
  • Financial Waste: The policy has cost $13 billion since 2012, with $486 million allocated to Nauru in 2023 (ASRC 2023). Despite evidence of fund mismanagement, $6M per detainee was allocated in the 2024-25 budget. This does not include the $408M soon to be provided to Nauru, plus $70M per year for 30 years (Talbot 2025).
  • Funds Mismanaged: The 2024 investigation into the embezzlement of the aid funds in PNG revealed that the Home Affairs Secretary, Stephanie Foster, acknowledged to Senate Estimates that she is unable to confirm if the $80M paid to PNG (2021-2022) reached refugees. Service providers report unpaid invoices, leaving refugees destitute (Middleton Paper 2024).
  • Accountability Failures: The 2021 PNG agreement had no mechanisms to track the funds. PNG’s Chief Migration Officer resigned amid corruption allegations; however, the lack of transparency in Australia continues (Middleton 2024).
  • Culture of Negligence: Dennis Richardson’s Review (2024) found Home Affairs ignored red flags, and the AFP investigation findings into contractors were not shared internally amongst relevant authorities.
  • Human Rights Abuses: Contracts with firms like MTC, a US prison company that was accused of human rights abuse, further exemplify misplaced priorities (ASRC 2023).
  • Fraudulent Contracts: A 2024 review exposed Home Affairs contracts with companies accused of sanction evasions, drug smuggling and arms dealing. DHA failed to produce evidence of cost-effective approaches according to the Auditor General’s 2019 review of Australian Government offshore detention contracts.

 

  1. Legal Violations
  • 2024 laws allow deportation to third countries without due process, risking refoulement.
  • Australia’s policy violates the 1951 Refugee Convention and has been condemned by human rights organisations, allies, and the UN (ASRC 2023).

 

Policy Options

  1. Status Quo: Indefinite detention ($12B+ cost in addition to the $408M soon to be provided to Nauru, plus $70M per year for 30 years, ongoing human rights and international law breaches).
  2. Reform and Accountability: Develop a Royal Commission into offshore detention. Create a statutorily independent oversight body (detention arbiter) comprised of human rights specialists, health professionals, judges, refugee representatives and specialists.
  3. Immediate end to offshore detention: End offshore detention (currently implausible).

 

Policy Recommendations  

  1. Royal Commission into offshore detention: Investigate historical and contemporary offshore detention centres and the associated legal complications, deaths, human rights abuses, medical neglect and financial mismanagement (e.g., $80M PNG funds).
  2. Demand details on the recent Nauru deal: specific conditions on which the deal is based, the legal advice the government received and the medical care available as part of the deal.
  3. Lobby for a statutorily independent oversight body: an independent oversight panel (detention arbiter) comprised of human rights specialists, health professionals, judges, refugee representatives and specialists.

 

Contact: Karuna Santosa

Student – Bachelor of Arts (Honours), Deakin University

email: kosantosa@deakin.edu.au

 

Sources Consulted

  1. Asylum Seeker Resource Centre (ASRC) (2023) ‘Finish This Crisis: Stories Exposing the Horrors of Offshore Detention’, ASRC, accessed: 10 July 2025
  2. Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) (2024) Health outcomes in offshore processing: 2024 analysis, AHRC, accessed: 10 July 2025
  3. Department of Home Affairs (2024) ‘Annual report 2023-24: Offshore processing expenditure’, Department of Home Affairs, accessed: 10 July 2025
  4. Middleton, R. (2024 February 17) ‘Money for PNG asylum seekers vanishes amid corruption scandal’, The Saturday Paper, accessed: 10 July 2025
  5. Refugee Council of Australia (RCA) (2025) ‘Ending arbitrary and indefinite offshore detention: Nauru, PNG and deportations’, RCA, accessed: 10 July 2025
  6. Richardson, D. (2024) ‘Review of Integrity and Governance in Regional Processing Contracts’, Australian Government, accessed: 10 July 2025
  7. Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee (28 May 2024) Hansard transcript: Budget estimates hearing, Australian Government, accessed: 10 July 2025
  8. Talbot, A. (6 September 2025) The NZYQ Nauru deportation deal, The Saturday Paper, accessed: 6 September 2025
  9. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2024) ‘Country report: Australia’s offshore processing regime’, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, accessed: 10 July 2025

 

 

Karuna Santosa

Karuna Santosa is a Golden-Key Honours Student (Top 15%) studying a Bachelor of Arts – Advanced (Honours). She was awarded a $20,000 scholarship over four years to study at Deakin University. She is a former student leader of the year at two universities and is an award-winning peer support worker. She is interested in interdisciplinary practices related to historical and contemporary anthropology of crime and violence, legal, cognitive, and medical anthropology.