Children Overboard Scandal and Australian Government Deception

The Damage of Government Deception in a Democracy

One of the most disillusioning things that can happen to a citizen of a democracy is to discover that one's own government — the legal and political extension of oneself — has lied to them. This is far more damaging, both to an individual's belief in their government and ultimately to that government itself, than is a citizen's mere disagreement with government policy. This does not, of course, only happen in Australia. Many Americans believed that their government should not have gone to war with Iraq, yet even as they disagreed with that decision, approval for President Bush remained high. However, after it was discovered that the Bush administration had lied to the American people about the necessity of going to war — and going to war quickly — more and more Americans began to hold an unfavorable opinion of their government, and rightly so.

If there is a single obligation that a democratic government has to its people, it is to tell them the truth. The Australian government recently failed to do this and, as a result, deserves to lose the confidence of the people it claims to represent.

Australia's Asylum Seeker Crisis: Context and Policy

One of the most shocking examples of the government's dishonesty occurred as part of the administration's attempt to limit the number of foreigners seeking asylum — often by desperate means. To understand the specific incident examined here, which involved asylum seekers allegedly putting children overboard in an attempt to be rescued by the HMAS Adelaide, it is important to understand something of the background of the influx of people seeking asylum in Australia.

Many asylum seekers come from the Middle East and North Africa and, according to the Department of Immigration, are often transported to Australia via Bangkok, which serves as a hub on an established smuggling route. The demographics of asylum seekers as of 2000 — which had not changed greatly in subsequent years — were as follows:

Australia was also, for a time, a destination for many people fleeing the war in Kosovo.

The Howard Government's Anti-Immigration Stance

The Australian government — ignoring the irony of a nation built through the hard work of people who were not wanted elsewhere now denying refuge to those who are themselves unwanted — denied entry to ships bearing refugees. It offered other nations both funds and aid to accept refugees bound for Australia, a policy that could reasonably be seen as an attempt to bribe other nations. This approach earned a formal rebuke from the international human rights organization Amnesty International:

"The recently-elected Australian government must seriously consider the consequences of its dispersal policy. While the world has been focused on the humanitarian and refugee crisis unfolding in and around Afghanistan, the Australian government has been sending boatloads of Afghans and other asylum-seekers around the Pacific. The policy has clearly failed to stop desperate asylum-seekers trying to reach Australia, and the people-smuggling rings have not been broken. While the government has been creating a 'fortress Australia,' hundreds of men, women, and children fleeing persecution and attempting to reach safety are being arbitrarily detained in camps and on boats, often in very poor conditions."

While Australia was also censured by international agencies including the United Nations, such criticism clearly did not affect the way the majority of Australians saw the problem of immigration. John Howard was re-elected to office in 2001 on a hard-line anti-immigration platform that, since the summer of 2001, had used Australian naval vessels to prevent refugees from landing. Even with the support of the citizens who voted him into power, Howard and his government failed to be open about their actions. This lack of disclosure and resistance to independent monitoring made many Australians suspicious of their government, even when there was no specific reason to be so.

The Children Overboard Incident

However, in the case examined here, there did appear to be ample reason for the government to be secretive about its actions — and for the people to feel that they had been betrayed by the Howard administration. While the population had generally been supportive of turning away refugees, as evidenced by the Howard government's strong showing at the polls in 2001, there are limits to what even an anti-immigration public will tolerate. The intentional abandonment of children who might drown is one of those limits. Intentionally lying to the public is another.

One of these things occurred on October 7, 2001, when a SIEV (suspected illegal entry vessel) entered Australian waters. The Howard government — as part of its re-election campaign — claimed that at least one child had been thrown overboard from the vessel. The purpose of this claim was to bolster the government's hard-line argument that refugee seekers were individuals who would do anything to secure asylum in Australia, even risk the lives of innocent children. The claim was inflammatory and politically convenient.

Conclusion: Betrayal of Democratic Trust

Few people are shocked to learn that governments — even democratically elected ones — lie to their own people. But sometimes those lies are so egregious and so despicable that they can topple governments. Howard and his administration accused the asylum seekers of victimizing innocent children. It turns out that it was the Australian government itself that was guilty of such an indecency.