Truth overboard at Gillian Triggs’ inquiry on children in detention

[nero_bolt]

Truth overboard at Gillian Triggs’ inquiry on children in detention 

Well done to Scott Morrison he ripper her and made her look stupid and a liar and this inquiry a political witch hunt

Well done to Immigration Department secretary Martin Bowles as well as he put her in her place after the blatant LIES she told... 

Worth watching the video and Gillian Triggs squirm when she is exposed as a liar

THE Human Rights Commission president must resign after turning her inquiry on children in detention into a political witch-hunt last week. 

Gillian Triggs’ behaviour was unforgivable for someone with semi-judicial powers, able to force witnesses to appear under threat of jail.

We cannot have the head of an inquiry showing such bias, heckling witnesses and making false and emotive claims from the bench to make the Christmas Island detention centre seem a hellhole.

Nor can we have an inquiry head giving media interviews attacking witnesses and summing up the issues before hearing all the evidence.

We also cannot have an inquiry head refusing to correct explosive claims about suicide attempts in detention when they’ve been debunked.

It is now impossible to have confidence in Triggs’ impartiality.

In fact, it’s hard not to suspect her inquiry is designed to reach a prejudged conclusion — to damn the Abbott Government’s successful border laws.

The very fact that Triggs, a law academic, called this taxpayer-funded inquiry is highly suspect.

The last time her commission looked into this issue was 2004 — which, what a surprise, was when the Howard government was stopping the boats, too.

No further inquiry was held in the seven years of Labor’s Rudd and Gillard governments, during which the border laws were weakened, luring more than 1200 men, women and children to their deaths and filling detention centres to bursting.

No, Triggs, appointed by Labor in 2012, waited until another Liberal government was back in power, stopping the boats and emptying the detention centres.

Sev Ozdowski, the former human rights commissioner responsible for the 2004 inquiry, calls this timing “very odd”.

“When the boats were arriving in large numbers and Labor was at its peak of cruelty towards the boat arrivals, (the commission) almost did not see the problem.”

But Triggs is now on the case, seemingly filled with a righteous anger at the Abbott Government, even though the boats have now stopped and the number of children in detention more than halved.

Last month, for instance, she claimed “we’ve had reports that have been confirmed during the day that 10 women have attempted suicide” on Christmas Island.

False. There has been only one case of self-harm by a woman that could with any credibility be described as “attempted suicide”. And, no, Madam President, sipping some shampoo does not qualify.

Triggs also claimed last month she’d visited the detained children on Christmas Island and “almost all of them, including the adults, were coughing, were sick, were depressed, unable to communicate (and) weak”, which made her want to ask: “What’s going on? Why is this child not being treated?”

False again. Sick children are indeed being treated and the Government hotly disputes Triggs’ claim that almost every detained child on Christmas Island is sick.

Told this, Triggs — with her inquiry still to hear from Immigration Minister Scott Morrison — gave another media interview rebuking Morrison as needing “to be better advised”, and insisting “all children should be removed from the detention centres and placed in the community”.

Er, isn’t that the very thing the inquiry is meant to determine at the end of the hearings, and not near the start? Should an inquiry head really be attacking witnesses even before they’ve given their evidence?

But if all that was bad, last week was a disgrace.

Morrison appeared before her inquiry and Triggs flew for his throat: “How can you justify detaining children in these conditions for more than a year when there is no evidence that this is the policy that is stopping the boats but rather Operation Sovereign Borders, however you define it, with three-star generals or civilian authorities, whatever name you put to it, the reality is that physical force and power have stopped these boats?”

Not biased? Triggs?

On it went.

Triggs insisted “the people on Christmas Island are being detained in a prison effectively” because on her three visits she had noticed “you cannot get into any of the sections without going through armed guards”.

That infuriated the Immigration Department secretary Martin Bowles, who protested at Triggs’ “emotive statements”.

“It is not fair to characterise the detention system as a jail,” he said, and Triggs should correct a falsehood.

“We do not have armed guards, President. I would like you to acknowledge that.”

Triggs would not, despite being repeatedly challenged on her “facts”.

But if the head of an inquiry can see armed guards where there are none, and a prison where there are only pool fences, what else is she imagining about what she’s supposed to impartially judge?

No, Triggs must resign. She is meant to confront injustice, not commit it.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/truth-overboard-at-gillian-triggs-inquiry-on-children-in-de...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[raptor_rebooted]

are there any children in immi detention centres

that are without parents/adult relatives?

what happens to these children if that was the case?

[raptor_rebooted]

No errors but no context either.

thank you. i watched the video on new matilda from

about 1:25 and couldn't find any errors either.

[karliandjacko]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:
She ele.. If someone wants to answer your question they will. What is the point of asking it repeatedly? Reminds me when you do the same thing threads like the missing MH plane. Do you even want a reply LOL?

---

Yes, I really, really do want a reply.

 It has been asserted by some poster heres that Ms Triggs was lying when she said a detention centre is effectively a prison. Obviously these posters  believe that  a detention centre is NOT effectively a prison  -who knows, they may even have valid reasons for that belief - but how can there be any  intelligent discussion on the subject when they either cannot or will not explain why they believe it?

---

She-el...*sigh* ..come on...read the posts.

Nobody said she was lying when she said detention centres are effectively prisons. That's her point of view, and it's debatable. 

The lie accusation was about her statement that she'd visited a detention centre and had to go through armed guard to get to each section. Mr Bowles challenged her on that point by emphaticall denying that guards are armed. I'm sure he wouldn't say that if it could be proven otherwise.

Seeing she based her view on the Detention centres being effectively prisons because they are guarded by armed guards, her argument was flawed.

---

And yet there are photos of armed guards with detainees at Christams Island. Are you suggesting the photos have been photo shopped?

It wasn't her argument that was flawed it was the behaviour of senior public servant and his minister that was.  These 2 arrogant men that insisted on shouting over the top of the chair refused to listen and put their own slant into the argument with the talk of Long bay and phosphate Hill.  Not all prisons are the same as Long Bay and not all detention centres have pool fencing like Phosphate Hill centre. their argument was nothing but bully boy behaviour against the chairperson and the committee.

Do you seriously believe that there are no armed staff at any of the detention centre locations?

Ms Trigg did not claim the Serco or G4S staff were armed. She didn't get a chance to specify who was armed and who wasn't, hence the comment that she would seek clarification.  

People did argue and say she was wrong about the centres effectively being prisons.

[icyfroth]

---

@karliandjacko wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:
She ele.. If someone wants to answer your question they will. What is the point of asking it repeatedly? Reminds me when you do the same thing threads like the missing MH plane. Do you even want a reply LOL?

---

Yes, I really, really do want a reply.

 It has been asserted by some poster heres that Ms Triggs was lying when she said a detention centre is effectively a prison. Obviously these posters  believe that  a detention centre is NOT effectively a prison  -who knows, they may even have valid reasons for that belief - but how can there be any  intelligent discussion on the subject when they either cannot or will not explain why they believe it?

---

She-el...*sigh* ..come on...read the posts.

Nobody said she was lying when she said detention centres are effectively prisons. That's her point of view, and it's debatable. 

The lie accusation was about her statement that she'd visited a detention centre and had to go through armed guard to get to each section. Mr Bowles challenged her on that point by emphaticall denying that guards are armed. I'm sure he wouldn't say that if it could be proven otherwise.

Seeing she based her view on the Detention centres being effectively prisons because they are guarded by armed guards, her argument was flawed.

---

And yet there are photos of armed guards with detainees at Christams Island. Are you suggesting the photos have been photo shopped?

do you have some?

if you mean this one:

they're customs officers.

It wasn't her argument that was flawed it was the behaviour of senior public servant and his minister that was.  These 2 arrogant men that insisted on shouting over the top of the chair refused to listen and put their own slant into the argument with the talk of Long bay and phosphate Hill.  Not all prisons are the same as Long Bay and not all detention centres have pool fencing like Phosphate Hill centre. their argument was nothing but bully boy behaviour against the chairperson and the committee.

It looked to me in the video like bullying tactics on both sides.

Do you seriously believe that there are no armed staff at any of the detention centre locations?

I have no reason not to believe it, after it was emphatically denied by Mr Bowles and reading  the report of the riot on Manus Island where it clearly stated the Security guards were not armed. There's no reason to think they're armed on other Islands, either.

It's possible ppl are confusing the guards with the PNG police mobile squad whose task it was to guard the centre perimeter. They are indeed armed and the witness reports showed that it was this group that beat the transferees with the butts of their guns.

Ms Trigg did not claim the Serco or G4S staff were armed. She didn't get a chance to specify who was armed and who wasn't, hence the comment that she would seek clarification.  

I'm sure we'll hear about it when she does.

People did argue and say she was wrong about the centres effectively being prisons.

I don't know about that, but the bone of contention was that she said you couldn't get from section to section without passing armed guards. And it's been emphatically denied that the security company guards, charged with guarding the internal centre, are armed.

---

[raptor_rebooted]

And yet there are photos of armed guards with detainees at Christams Island. Are you suggesting the photos have been photo shopped?

not sure i havent seen any. is it possible for you

to post them here or links maybe ?

It's possible ppl are confusing the guards with the PNG police mobile squad whose task it was to guard the centre perimeter. They are indeed armed and the witness reports showed that it was this group that beat the transferees with the butts of their guns.

I thought the same

[karliandjacko]

The minister and his senior public servant should have answered and explained who was armed and who wasn't instead of playing pedantic games.

They should have stated who is armed and who isn't.  it could have been cleared up so easily if they had explained that security guards are not armed and that the police, defence personnel or whoever else are.  They should also have explained at what stage some officers are armed or not.  They were hostile and rude instead.  

[karliandjacko]

they're customs officers.

So what? They're acting in the capacity of armed guards for all intents and purposes with the asylum seeker transfers.  That's what they should have clarified to Ms Triggs instead of treating her like an idiot that had no right to ask questions while doing her job.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

No errors but no context either.

thank you. i watched the video on new matilda from

about 1:25 and couldn't find any errors either.

---

If you watched the video then I am sure you will agree that the way that you presented the transcript and stopping it at that particular moment could be deemed misleading.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

are there any children in immi detention centres

that are without parents/adult relatives?

what happens to these children if that was the case?

---

Yes there are.

What happens to them? They are detained with all the other refugees.

Unfortunately the governemtn refuses to disclose how many children are unaccompanied.  That also means that we have no information about their welfare. 

The UNHCR has isued a number of reports about it.