Abstract
Since the 1970s, Indonesia has been acting as a transit country for asylum seekers and refugees to reach Australia and New Zealand. Being a non-state party to the Refugee Convention, Indonesia has become the strategic partner for Australia in managing the issue of asylum seekers and refugees. The two countries have been involved in many bilateral and regional arrangements to tackle the issues. The “Bali process” is one of Indonesia and Australia's arrangements to lead the region in tackling forced migration and refugees. Unfortunately, despite their “common” interests, many of Australia's policies towards asylum seekers have negatively impacted Indonesia in many ways. This paper uses desk study research with a normative approach to analyse nationally and internationally relevant laws and policies. This paper analyses the Bali Process as regional cooperation means of burden-sharing in which Indonesia and Australia play dominant roles while scrutinising how both countries implement the policies within their domestic realms. In addition, the dynamics within the two countries will also be examined to understand how they shape their policies. This paper argues that Indonesia has fulfilled its part by managing these protected persons within Indonesia. However, Australia seems to consistently try to shift its burden to Indonesia as its neighbouring state. By revisiting the Bali Process arrangement, it is suggested that Australia needs to respect its commitment and take any means necessary to keep good relations with its neighbours, including Indonesia.
Highlights
The legal protection for cross-border refugees has been conceived as a “global public good” where states are concerned to share the burden of such protection.1 As discussed in detail later, Sriwijaya Law Review ◼ Vol 6 Issue 1, January (2022) [70]Arie Afriansyah, Hadi Rahmat Purnama, and Akbar Kurnia Putra the principle of burden-sharing or responsibility sharing has its roots in the 1951 Refugee Convention,2 as embodied in its Preamble and Article 35, and assumes “an expectation of reciprocity” between states. 3 in reality, such a burden in handling the issues of asylum seekers and refugees has been very uneven in parts of the world
This paper argues that Indonesia has fulfilled its part by managing these protected persons within Indonesia
The protection for asylum seekers and refugees appears to be no longer conceived as a "global public good" where states have adopted self-interest policies
Summary
The legal protection for cross-border refugees has been conceived as a “global public good” where states are concerned to share the burden of such protection. As discussed in detail later, Sriwijaya Law Review ◼ Vol 6 Issue 1, January (2022) [70]Arie Afriansyah, Hadi Rahmat Purnama, and Akbar Kurnia Putra the principle of burden-sharing or responsibility sharing has its roots in the 1951 Refugee Convention, as embodied in its Preamble and Article 35, and assumes “an expectation of reciprocity” between states. 3 in reality, such a burden in handling the issues of asylum seekers and refugees has been very uneven in parts of the world. 3 in reality, such a burden in handling the issues of asylum seekers and refugees has been very uneven in parts of the world. This situation has been heavily influenced by the notoriously trending policies of the destination countries on "cooperative deterrence" and “diverse non-entrée measures”.5. As the region that gave birth to the Convention on Refugees, Europe has been experiencing an influx of asylum seekers coming from the African and middle eastern region in the last decade, fleeing from life-threatening situations in their home countries.. Despite the European Union's standard policy in managing the arrival of refugees, the rejection by some states creates a disruption to the burden-sharing in protecting the refugees, which is another challenge to international law. Some explicitly and strongly reject the asylum wave. The rejecting countries have even securitised their boundaries to prevent the asylum seekers reach their border. Despite the European Union's standard policy in managing the arrival of refugees, the rejection by some states creates a disruption to the burden-sharing in protecting the refugees, which is another challenge to international law.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
