About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline



18 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 1 (2003-2004)
Australian Immigration Policy at the Centenary: The Quest for Control

handle is hein.journals/geoimlj18 and id is 11 raw text is: ARTICLES
AUSTRALIAN IMMIGRATION POLICY AT THE
CENTENARY: THE QUEST FOR CONTROL22
CARLOS SCOF LOPEZ*

Contents**

1.  INTRODUCTION AND RECENT CURRENT EVENTS ..................                   2
II.  CONFIRMATION OF THE 'STANDARD CONTENTION'. ...............                  6
A.   Mandatory Detention, Asylee Interception, and Border
Exclusion Zones .................................                      6
B.   Recent Political Developments ....................                    10
C.   Biased Standards and Decreased Numbers ...........                    14
III.  RATIONALES AND A THEORY OF AUSTRALIAN HISTORY ...........                  17
A.   The White Australia Policy .......................                    17
B.   Multiculturalism and Changing Laws ...............                 21
IV.   THE ALTERNATIVE VIEW: A QUEST FOR CONTROL ..............                  23
A. Alternative View Defined .......................... 23
* Co-Director, Jerome Frank Legal Services Organization / Immigration Legal Services at the
Yale Law School (New Haven, CT, USA) and formerly with the Refugee Advice and Casework
Service (Sydney, New South Wales, Australia) and the Refugee and Immigration Legal Centre
(Melbourne, Victoria, Australia). The author would like to thank Prof. Peter Schuck (The Yale Law
School), Prof. Stephen Legomsky (at numerous institutions, including Oxford University), Margaret
Piper (Executive Director of the Australian Refugee Council), and David Chalke (Director of
Australscan) for their input and perspectives on immigration law, particularly in Australia.
** British spelling conventions are used throughout this paper, consistent with current practice
throughout the states and territories of the Commonwealth of Australia. Furthermore, the pronoun
his is used to refer to decisions by individual government ministers who have all been male, though
it is fully likely these ministers may someday be women.