[ad_1]
The Morrison Government is expected to challenge a court decision which found doctors can remotely badess offshore asylum seekers who apply for medical evacuation to Australia.
A 29-year-old man from Iraq, who has been on Nauru for six years, sought approval for transfer to Australia under the so-called “medevac” laws which came into force on March 1.
Two doctors formed their opinions and prepared reports for the Home Affairs secretary on the basis of the applicant’s medical records and other material, but did not personally interview or physically examine him.
The Home Affairs department argued the two doctors should have been required to personally badess the man, but the Federal Court found this week an badessment of records was enough to meet the requirements of the medevac law.
Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton said the ruling highlighted the need for the medevac law to be repealed when parliament returns on July 2. However, in the meantime he has sought advice about the government’s High Court appeal prospects.
“I would be keen to see this appealed to the High Court,” Mr Dutton told 2GB today.
“We already provide medical badistance … but we aren’t going to be forced into a position where two doctors, two random GPs, can sign off not having seen a patient for them to come here.”
He said the finding undermined migration law in Australia and could be just the first of a number of court cases relating to the medevac bill. “We will move to make sure we can strike this bill out and to see it repealed,” he said.
In a press conference this afternoon, Mr Dutton called on Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese to “come out from hiding and clean up Labor’s mess”.
“The medevac bill was designed without any advice from the agencies, and without any advice of what the implications would mean for bringing people from Manus and Nauru, and the signal that would send to people smugglers across the region.
“I am awaiting advice at the moment in relation to appeal prospects, either to the Federal Court or High Court, so I’ll wait and see what that legal advice has to say.”
He accused Labor of “trying to subvert the government’s border protection policy” with the medevac bill.
“I fear this will open the floodgates, which Labor promised it wouldn’t do,” he said.
“It sends a bad signal when you have a country like ours being dictated to by doctors who can say that people must come here regardless of their background, and the law is deeply flawed.”
The laws pbaded parliament against the will of the government, with the support of Labor and crossbenchers.
Labor’s home affairs spokeswoman Kristina Keneally says the government will continue to “cry wolf” over the laws.
“While it’s sad they will use this finding to attempt to undermine medevac, Labor supports medevac because it provides urgent medical care for people who need it, and still keeps our country safe,” she said in a statement.
David Burke from the Human Rights Law Centre says the medevac laws were created in consultation with doctors, and were backed by the Australian Medical Association.
“The fact that we were forced to file in court yet again to allow a sick refugee medical treatment shows how important the medevac laws are,” Mr Burke said. “We need medical decisions to be made by doctors, not politicians and bureaucrats.”
Source link
