Morrison does not understand Nauru Constitution

Editor’s Note: The Scott Morrison referred to in the article below is the Member for Cook (not the electorate in Nth Qld which had the first aboriginal state member of any parliament, Eric Deeral), that’s Scott Morrison in the photo of the BBQ. Cook (see map below) is one of the places where the British invaded lands of the first nation people of Australia. Scott Morrison is a refugee of sorts himself, accorded privilege by virtue of British conquest of Aboriginal lands. You won’t find any history of that on the Shadow immigration minister’s website. You will find Scott Morrison’s top priority as being to ‘Restore our Nations Birthplace‘ by which I think he means the descendants of the British.

Why not send Scott Morrison and his supporters by boat to Port Arthur in Tasmania and put someone in charge, say Mr. Ruddock, just to make sure that they do not get in or out of their detention centre and so that they do not inconvenience the descendants of Truganini, a proud first nation person of Tasmania.

This is to put the article below in context.

Ian Curr
July 2010


Here is the article:


Earlier, Mr Morrison said Nauru would be an instant solution to stop asylum seeker boats arriving in Australia, dismissing Labor’s claims that a deadlocked Nauruan parliament was a barrier.
“The constitution of Nauru enables the president to enter into an agreement with Australia to reopen the centre,” Mr Morrison told reporters in Brisbane.
“There are no constitutional barriers. It could be done today, it could have been done three weeks ago.
“I’ve also met with the opposition leader of Nauru and he has indicated strong support.” SMH today

Has he forgotton or does he not know that Australia assisted Nauru to write its constitution in which there is a provision that no person will be detained arbitrarily without charge.
This prohibits the sort of indefinite arbitrary detention which Australia indulges in.

In order to overcome this constitutional legal problem – a legal fiction was dreamt up by Howard bozos.

Nauru did not have a detention centre- it had a “reception and processing centre” and the asylum seekers dumped there were issued with a “visa” which only allowed them to stay in the “reception and processing centre” – clever eh? Howard, Downer and Ruddock thought so.

Morrison clearly knows about this which is why he is woofing about there being ” no constitutional problem”.

As for this rubbish that asylum seekers had club med privileges – bicycling swimming etc.

They were locked up in black plastic shelters with flush toilets with no water to flush them and potable water available for a few hours per day- on some days. We have photos to prove that people lugged water by bucket to their shelters.

Only in the last days when a few people were left languishing on the island, were they allowed to leave the camp with a curfew imposed.

How did Nauru protect the human rights of the last two men left on Nauru? Then the last man left on Nauru?

Truth is a scarce commodity in an election – could we not have just a little drop of truth.

Please ask Scott Morrison which part of the Nauru Constitution on Protection of Personal Liberty which he does not understand.

Pamela Curr
Campaign Coordinator
Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
12 Batman Street, Melbourne
ph 0393266066 / 0417517075

FACT: Australia June 2010 - 508 CHILDREN IN DETENTION


Constitution of Nauru

Protection of personal liberty

5.(1.) No person shall be deprived of his personal liberty, except as authorised by law in any of the following cases:-

(a) in execution of the sentence or order of a court in respect of an offence of which he has been convicted; (b) for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court; (c) upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed, or being about to commit, an offence; (d) under the order of a court, for his education during any period ending not later than the thirty‑first day of December after he attains the age of eighteen years; (e) under the order of a court, for his welfare during any period ending not later than the date on which he attains the age of twenty years; (f) for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease; (g) in the case of a person who is, or is reasonably suspected to be, of unsound mind or addicted to drugs or alcohol, for the purpose of his care or treatment or the protection of the community; and (h) for the purpose of preventing his unlawful entry into Nauru, or for the purpose of effecting his expulsion, extradition or other lawful removal from Nauru.

(2.) A person who is arrested or detained shall be informed promptly of the reasons for the arrest or detention and shall be permitted to consult in the place in which he is detained a legal representative of his own choice.

(3.) A person who has been arrested or detained in the circumstances referred to in paragraph (c) of clause (1.) of this Article and has not been released shall be brought before a judge or some other person holding judicial office within a period of twenty‑four hours after the arrest or detention and shall not be further held in custody in connexion with that offence except by order of a judge or some other person holding judicial office.

(4.) Where a complaint is made to the Supreme Court that a person is unlawfully detained, the Supreme Court shall enquire into the complaint and, unless satisfied that the detention is lawful, shall order that person to be brought before it and shall release him

Please comment down below