Rejoinder: Removing Barriers to the Emergence and Assessment of Claims of Gender-Based Persecution by Asylum Seekers in Australia

Abstract

We are pleased that, in keeping with the recommendations of the Palmer Report (2005), which drew attention to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship's (DIAC) ‘lack of openness and transparency’, DIAC has chosen to respond to an invitation to comment on our critique of their processing of women who may be eligible to claim asylum on grounds of gender-based persecution (GBP). DIAC's main criticisms of our research are methodological. In reply, we think it is important to highlight the discussions in refugee studies in the last decade about the merits of different methodological approaches to research, including the valuable role to be played by various forms of qualitative research (see for example Journal of Refugee Studies20(2), 2007). DIAC officials declined an invitation to be interviewed for our research, and chose to participate via a written questionnaire. We are not certain how DIAC approached this questionnaire response; we can only assume that it represents the most accurate description of their practices.