<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Getting real on children&#8217;s rights: Is offshore processing compatible with Australia&#8217;s legal obligations to child refugee applicants?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/getting-real-on-childrens-rights-is-offshore-processing-compatible-with-australias-legal-obligations-to-child-refugee-applicants/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/getting-real-on-childrens-rights-is-offshore-processing-compatible-with-australias-legal-obligations-to-child-refugee-applicants/</link>
	<description>Oxford Human Rights Hub</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:43:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Sam		</title>
		<link>https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/getting-real-on-childrens-rights-is-offshore-processing-compatible-with-australias-legal-obligations-to-child-refugee-applicants/#comment-29</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 01:58:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://humanrights.dev3.oneltd.eu/?p=248#comment-29</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This piece focuses on the international law wrongs of the Government&#039;s proposals, Article by Article, in a way that suggests those international law norms are conclusory and extremely persuasive. 
Are we sure this is the most effective/persuasive way to engage with contemporary Australian legal and political discourse?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This piece focuses on the international law wrongs of the Government&#8217;s proposals, Article by Article, in a way that suggests those international law norms are conclusory and extremely persuasive.<br />
Are we sure this is the most effective/persuasive way to engage with contemporary Australian legal and political discourse?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
