5 ways to tackle Australia’s backlog of asylum cases

People who apply for asylum in Australia face significant delays in having their claims processed. These delays undermine the integrity of the asylum system, erode public confidence and cause significant distress to people seeking asylum.

There are, at the time of writing, 28,691 applications for a protection visa awaiting a decision at the Department of Home Affairs. At least 43,308 applications await review at the Administrative Review Tribunal.

For people seeking asylum who have their initial applications refused and seek review in the Administrative Review Tribunal and in the Federal Circuit and Family Court, the process can often take more than ten years.

Whoever wins the upcoming election inherits the daunting task of addressing this issue.

Our research evaluated data on Australia’s previous attempts to increase efficiency of asylum processing. We also examined international best practice for designing fair and fast procedures, including lessons from recent successful asylum reforms in Switzerland.

Here are five ways to make Australia’s asylum process more efficient.

1. Recognise fairness enhances efficiency

In most countries with asylum systems, processing is neither fair nor fast.

When trying to increase efficiency, many governments have limited the ability of a person seeking asylum to fairly put forward their case.

Australia, the United States, and many countries across Europe have introduced accelerated or fast-track procedures that drop essential safeguards including:

• the right to an interview
• access to legal assistance, and
• the opportunity to respond to information that undermines their claim for asylum.

But these efforts don’t just undermine fairness. They also contribute to slower processing.

Such measures tend to lead to more appeals, and more cases being overturned by courts and tribunals. This contributes to longer delays.

Our research into Australia’s now-abolished fast-track procedures demonstrates this. This policy was introduced by the Coalition government in 2014, with the aim of speeding up processing and reducing the backlog of asylum applications.

It included the creation of a new streamlined review process before the Immigration Assessment Authority. Applicants were generally not interviewed or allowed to put forward new information.

The resulting system was not only unfair; it was also excruciatingly slow.

Four in five cases were appealed to the court. About 37% of these were overturned. The delays created by increased litigation clearly counteracted any time saved.

One of the best ways to improve the efficiency of asylum processing is to ensure applicants can present their cases effectively from the outset.