The election motivated Australia’s release of refugees like me, not human rights obligations

The Australian government has been releasing refugees from its onshore detention over the past month, ending several years of detention for many, in a move shrouded in secrecy.

Undoubtedly, any decision that leads to the release of imprisoned asylum seekers is commendable, but there are things to consider about the government's actions that I hope will be taken into account.

Firstly, the human rights and legal aspects of this liberation should outweigh any political interests. The release of refugees on Australian soil in the run-up to the election reinforces the suspicion that the decision was not based on issues of human rights, but on the circumstances of this election.

Given Australia's legal system has a democratic background and the country is a signatory to the Geneva conventions, the government was expected to address the human rights of internally imprisoned refugees and those still detained on Nauru and Manus Island, and release the two groups together.

Refugees onshore and offshore have been detained for long periods, some for almost a decade. They have been deprived of their basic rights, such as the right to education, work, and mental and physical health, among many others.

In accordance with human rights law, it was expected that all those affected would be released, especially those deported to offshore processing centres.

It is not possible for me to know the intentions of the government's decision, but the release of refugees inside the country without paying attention to those imprisoned offshore, who are facing the most difficult conditions, suggests the decision is at least in part motivated by the election, rather than human rights.