“共同语言”和能力测试:对澳大利亚注册移民代理注册要求的关键审查

IF 1.3 Q1 LAW Griffith Law Review Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI:10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031
L. Smith-Khan
{"title":"“共同语言”和能力测试:对澳大利亚注册移民代理注册要求的关键审查","authors":"L. Smith-Khan","doi":"10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Registered Migration Agents (RMAs), the practitioners who assist with Australian visa applications and appeals, play a crucial role in navigating these complex legal procedures. RMAs’ registration requirements, including those relating to English language proficiency (ELP), have thus garnered much attention, leading to government-commissioned reviews and inquiries, and amendments to regulations. The most recent changes have attracted scrutiny by the Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, due to the unequal burden to prove ELP placed on different applicants based on their backgrounds. However, these new requirements ultimately came into force without the government satisfying the Committee that they were human rights-compliant. This article examines the most recent ELP rules for RMAs and the Immigration Minister’s justifications for these. Drawing on sociolinguistic scholarship, it finds that rules requiring general ELP tests, and categorically exempting certain applicants from testing, rely on problematic assumptions about the nature of language, and are therefore unnecessarily discriminatory. Given the government aims to ensure specific communicative competencies within the migration advice setting, the analysis concludes that these specific competencies should be the focus of any required assessment.","PeriodicalId":45376,"journal":{"name":"Griffith Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Common language’ and proficiency tests: a critical examination of registration requirements for Australian registered migration agents\",\"authors\":\"L. Smith-Khan\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Registered Migration Agents (RMAs), the practitioners who assist with Australian visa applications and appeals, play a crucial role in navigating these complex legal procedures. RMAs’ registration requirements, including those relating to English language proficiency (ELP), have thus garnered much attention, leading to government-commissioned reviews and inquiries, and amendments to regulations. The most recent changes have attracted scrutiny by the Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, due to the unequal burden to prove ELP placed on different applicants based on their backgrounds. However, these new requirements ultimately came into force without the government satisfying the Committee that they were human rights-compliant. This article examines the most recent ELP rules for RMAs and the Immigration Minister’s justifications for these. Drawing on sociolinguistic scholarship, it finds that rules requiring general ELP tests, and categorically exempting certain applicants from testing, rely on problematic assumptions about the nature of language, and are therefore unnecessarily discriminatory. Given the government aims to ensure specific communicative competencies within the migration advice setting, the analysis concludes that these specific competencies should be the focus of any required assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Griffith Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Griffith Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Griffith Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2021.1900031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

注册移民代理(rma),协助澳大利亚签证申请和上诉的从业人员,在导航这些复杂的法律程序中起着至关重要的作用。因此,军事管理局的注册要求,包括与英语语言能力(ELP)有关的要求,引起了人们的广泛关注,导致政府委托进行审查和调查,并修订了法规。最近的变化引起了澳大利亚议会人权联合委员会的仔细审查,因为根据不同的背景,不同的申请人在证明ELP方面的负担是不平等的。然而,这些新的要求最终生效时,政府并没有使委员会确信这些要求符合人权。本文考察了最新的针对移民管理机构的ELP规则以及移民部长对此的理由。根据社会语言学的学术研究,报告发现,要求进行一般的语言能力测试,并断然免除某些申请人的测试的规定,是基于对语言性质的有问题的假设,因此是不必要的歧视。鉴于政府的目标是在移民咨询设置中确保特定的交际能力,分析得出的结论是,这些特定的能力应该是任何必要评估的重点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Common language’ and proficiency tests: a critical examination of registration requirements for Australian registered migration agents
ABSTRACT Registered Migration Agents (RMAs), the practitioners who assist with Australian visa applications and appeals, play a crucial role in navigating these complex legal procedures. RMAs’ registration requirements, including those relating to English language proficiency (ELP), have thus garnered much attention, leading to government-commissioned reviews and inquiries, and amendments to regulations. The most recent changes have attracted scrutiny by the Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, due to the unequal burden to prove ELP placed on different applicants based on their backgrounds. However, these new requirements ultimately came into force without the government satisfying the Committee that they were human rights-compliant. This article examines the most recent ELP rules for RMAs and the Immigration Minister’s justifications for these. Drawing on sociolinguistic scholarship, it finds that rules requiring general ELP tests, and categorically exempting certain applicants from testing, rely on problematic assumptions about the nature of language, and are therefore unnecessarily discriminatory. Given the government aims to ensure specific communicative competencies within the migration advice setting, the analysis concludes that these specific competencies should be the focus of any required assessment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Reconceptualising the crimes of Big Tech The current legal regime of the Indonesian outer small islands Mainstreaming climate change in legal education Skeletons in the cupboard: reading settler anxiety in Mabo and Love Post-enlargement (free) movement in the EU: who really counts as EU CITIZEN? understanding Dano through the lens of Orientalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1