Broader asylum policy won’t change

IF the High Court case goes entirely against the government, it would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the broader policy of stopping the people-smuggling trade.

A defeat for the government could be a mere tactical setback — a sideshow that had no impact on the main game. The worst that might happen is that relations with Sri Lanka might be harmed and Tony Abbott might be ­embarrassed at the hands of the nation’s highest court.

But unless the High Court judges have a rush of blood to the head — and that is unlikely — the practical impact of this case on the broader stop-the-boats policy would be negligible.

It might prevent Sri Lankans found at sea from being returned to Sri Lanka. It might also require the asylum claims of all persons found in boats beyond Australia’s borders to be formally processed under the Migration Act, not the truncated system used at sea that was pioneered by the former ­government.

None of that would disturb the main thrust of the government’s strategy, which is based on sending boatpeople to Manus Island or Nauru, denying them any possibility of residence in Australia, yet formally processing their claims to asylum.

The nature of this case ensures that its main impact will be political and diplomatic. The affair is all about “refoulement” — or the risk that some genuine refugees could be returned to places where they might be harmed.

A defeat is likely to be portrayed as an implicit rejection of ­Abbott’s assurance that “no harm would come to anyone who has been in our charge” if they were returned to Sri Lanka.

Even if the High Court makes no direct finding about the alleged dangers awaiting returning boatpeople, Sri Lanka’s reputation will almost certainly be further tarnished the longer this case drags out. Anyone who is expecting a quick decision from the High Court is mistaken. There will now be a 21-day delay for a directions hearing, which is when a hearing date is likely to be set. Faced with such a drawn out and damaging process, it would come as no surprise if the government were to cut its losses, forgo the option of sending these people back to Sri Lanka and instead process their claims in the normal way at Manus Island or Nauru.