Mr MACPHEE (Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs) —by leave-On 26 February the honourable member for Casey (Mr Falconer) drew the attention of the House to Press reports of interviews with Miss Liliana Gasinskaya in which it was claimed that she had retained her Soviet citizenship and her Soviet passport to travel overseas last year and had visited her parents in the Soviet Union. Bearing in mind Miss Gasinskaya's claims in 1979 when she was granted refugee status on the recommendation of the Determination of Refugee Status Committee that she held a well-founded fear of persecution should she return to her homeland, I instructed the Chairman of the DORS Committee to make inquiries into the reported statements in the Press and elsewhere.

Following this, officials conducted an extensive inquiry into Miss Gasinskaya's activities over the last year. Miss Gasinskaya was subsequently interviewed on two occasions. During these interviews marked inconsistencies in her various accounts of her overseas visits emerged.

Despite these inconsistencies, my Department was able to establish beyond reasonable doubt that at no stage had she visited the Soviet Union and that she had not used a Soviet travel document for a visit to Britain last year. Miss Gasinskaya travelled to the United Kingdom and returned using a certificate of identity issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs for use by non-citizens when they travel abroad. In the first interview Miss Gasinskaya claimed that she had not returned to the Soviet Union but that she had visited her mother in London. In the second interview she admitted that she has not seen her mother since she arrived in a Soviet vessel in Sydney over two years ago. Independent checks by my Department have confirmed this. Having examined all the evidence, the DORS Committee has advised me as follows:

The Committee is of the view that, on the evidence available, there are insufficient grounds for revocation of Liliana Gasinskaya's refugee status.

However, during these interviews Miss Gasinskaya admitted that she had applied to the Soviet authorities for the return of her Soviet citizenship and the issue of an appropriate travel document valid for travel to the Soviet Union and return. I am informed that, in so doing she sought certain assurances from the Soviet authorities. In making these applications Miss Gasinskaya was no doubt motivated by an understandable desire to see her family again. Her applications however raise new issues, the significance of which Miss Gasinskaya does not appear to comprehend. If her application were to be granted by the Soviet Authorities so that she again became a citizen of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Article 1C of the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees would apply. It states:

This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of Section A if:

(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality; or

(2) Having lost his nationality, he has voluntarily reacquired it . . .

For this reason, the Committee has advised me that it 'is of the view that the question of Miss Gasinskaya's refugee status should be kept under review. Miss Gasinskaya should be counselled about the seriousness of her situation and the possible results of any such action.'

It is difficult to explain Miss Gasinskaya's actions throughout the investigation and the motives that might lie behind them. The inconsistencies in her various statements have caused me great concern and have led me to scrutinise all of these inconsistencies most carefully.

Having done so, I have come to the same conclusion as the DORS Committee, namely that she has not breached the Convention under which she was granted refugee status despite the fact that even the kindest critic of her public utterances would regard her conduct as disturbing and extraordinary for a refugee. I have instructed the Chairman of the DORS Committee that she should be counselled about her situation and the prospect that, should she proceed with her application to reacquire Soviet citizenship, she would come within the terms of Article 1C (2) of the Geneva Convention and would lose her refugee status.

The question of her resident status in Australia is a separate matter. Miss Gasinskaya was granted permanent residence by the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs soon after being granted refugee status by my predecessor. She left Australia in June last year. Whilst she was given a return endorsement prior to her departure, she did not receive a new entry permit granting either permanent or temporary residence when she re-entered Australia in August. At that point her previous entry permit which afforded her permanent residence in Australia expired in accordance with the provisions of the Migration Act. I am informed by my Department that this was due to an oversight by a Commonwealth Officer on the primary line.

To regularise Miss Gasinskaya's status I have decided that she should be given a temporary entry permit, with permission to work, for a period of six months. This will enable her to consider her position and be counselled by my Department about the consequences of her actions. If she proceeds with her application to the Soviet authorities she will do so in the full knowledge of what that means in terms of her refugee and resident status. If she withdraws her applications or should they be refused by the Soviet authorities I would be prepared to consider an application from her for the restoration of her permanent residency.

Miss Gasinskaya is being informed of my decision and has been advised to keep the Regional Director of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs in Sydney informed of her intentions.

The granting of refugee status is a most important act. Those granted refugee status have rights and privileges bestowed by the international convention and protocol relating to the status of refugees which Australia has ratified. It is important that refugee status should be given only to those who meet the definition in the convention and that refugee status is not abused. As I have indicated, the DORS Committee advised me that Miss Gasinskaya has not taken any action which would justify removing her refugee status but she has taken action which could lead to a course of events which would involve her losing refugee status.

I believe that as this matter was raised in Parliament it is appropriate that I should respond in Parliament. The delay in making this response reflects the conflicting nature of assertions made by Miss Gasinskaya and the importance of the issues raised as a consequence.