Post by angra on Aug 20, 2012 9:28:19 GMT 10
ABC's The Drum gives space to some seriously weird stuff at times, but this one is a beaut. "Malaria on Manus Island: a threat to human rights" by Alexandra Phelan.
She argues that placing detainees on Manus Island is a threat to their human rights, because they might contract malaria.
This conveniently ignores the endemic health risks in the countries they have already travelled through.
But the big bloody elephant in the room is that the 50,000 or so Manus Islanders are subject to the same risk - permanently. "The right to health provides that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and their family" she says.
"If plans to re-establish Manus Island are followed through, Australia will most definitely risk violating a number of the asylum seekers' human rights and protections under international law, in particular, the asylum seekers' right to health under article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and possibly, their right to life."
But she doesn't even mention the local people. Should there be a special asylum-seeker malaria programme without bothering to consider the Manusians themselves?
She's also out-of-date. New anti-malaria vaccines have been trialled for the last few years by Melbourne Uni scientists in PNG have been shown to be very effective against P. falciparum. Better to fund this surely?
I am not arguing for the reopening of the Manus prison, but to try and make an argument against it based on the rights of detainees whilst completely ignoring the greater need of the local population is utterly hypocritical and indeed nonsense of the highest order.
Let a few thousand local buggers die, but we must by all means protect a few hundred refugees from a deadly disease.
Sheesh!
She argues that placing detainees on Manus Island is a threat to their human rights, because they might contract malaria.
This conveniently ignores the endemic health risks in the countries they have already travelled through.
But the big bloody elephant in the room is that the 50,000 or so Manus Islanders are subject to the same risk - permanently. "The right to health provides that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of themselves and their family" she says.
"If plans to re-establish Manus Island are followed through, Australia will most definitely risk violating a number of the asylum seekers' human rights and protections under international law, in particular, the asylum seekers' right to health under article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and possibly, their right to life."
But she doesn't even mention the local people. Should there be a special asylum-seeker malaria programme without bothering to consider the Manusians themselves?
She's also out-of-date. New anti-malaria vaccines have been trialled for the last few years by Melbourne Uni scientists in PNG have been shown to be very effective against P. falciparum. Better to fund this surely?
I am not arguing for the reopening of the Manus prison, but to try and make an argument against it based on the rights of detainees whilst completely ignoring the greater need of the local population is utterly hypocritical and indeed nonsense of the highest order.
Let a few thousand local buggers die, but we must by all means protect a few hundred refugees from a deadly disease.
Sheesh!
