Peter Dutton has defended Australia’s asylum seeker policies after the Guardian’s publication of the Nauru files, more than 2,000 leaked incident reports from Australia’s offshore detention centre on the Pacific island of Nauru.

Speaking on ABC’s 7.30 on Thursday, Dutton made a wide range of claims about the incident reports published by the Guardian, the nature of the allegations they disclosed and whether Australia was responsible for what happened on Nauru.

He also rejected comparisons between the Nauru detention centre and Guantanamo Bay, as organisations around the world have lined up to condemn the Australian government.

'People have self-immolated to get to Australia' – immigration minister's response to Nauru files Read more

We’ve taken a look at his comments and fact-checked his claims. Here’s how they stack up.

What’s contained in the Nauru files and the accuracy of the reports

Peter Dutton said: There are some that are legitimate and there are others that aren’t and others that have been found not to be substantiated. I think it is important to recognise of the 2,000 reports many could include a complaint about food or about kids not going to school, parent disciplining a child within the regional centre, that makes up the 2,000.

The files published by the Guardian do contain a range of types of reports, but they are considerably more severe and significant than Dutton has suggested. Many of the files contain eyewitness testimony from the guards, caseworkers, child protection workers and teachers on the island. This primary evidence carries considerable weight, particularly when these staff members see first-hand instances of abuse or assaults. They are not historical, and date up to October 2015, well beyond the scope of successive Australian government inquiries into much earlier allegations.

By way of example of the seriousness of incidents, there were 156 reports of threatened self-harm involving children. There were 59 reports of assault on a minor, and 170 reports of “concern for a minor” – which includes everything from an uneven floor that might cause people to trip to alleged sexual assault and self-harm.

There are more than just those though. Mis-categorisation incidents is also a theme throughout the data – and we know that serious events are also simply not reported on Nauru – so even these counts are likely to be a conservative estimate.

Even the less serious events contribute to a stressful environment of surveillance, say former teachers who worked on the island. Sometimes caseworkers will document an incident that could be considered less severe because they know that incidents can quickly escalate to self harms or other forms of serious incidents, as the length of detention of asylum seekers steadily increases.

The seriousness of incidents disclosed in the Nauru files

Dutton: Well, out of the 2,000 as I understand it, those analysed so far ... over 20 are critical, so you’re talking about where there’s been an allegation of sexual assault, so that might be a person within the regional processing centre that’s alleged to have assaulted a female or male within the centre.

Dutton’s comments vastly underestimate of the seriousness of incidents. The security company Wilson Security has regularly downgraded the seriousness of incident reports on the island, among four descending categories of critical, major, minor and information. So a report of self-harm that should be critical could be downgraded to major. Psychologist and traumatologist Paul Stevenson, who visited Nauru 12 times to counsel and support Wilson guards, said reports were regularly downgraded and there was a constant financial pressure to de-escalate the reported severity of fights or acts of self-harm.

As a consequence of this dubious record-keeping there are far more reports of sexual assault and child abuse than Dutton has claimed.

Australia’s role on Nauru

Dutton: “We will work with the Nauruan authorities and police force to provide support to those people [who make allegations of abuse] ... Nauru is not part of Australia, so this is an issue for the Nauruan government.”

This perennial myth peddled by the Australian government doesn’t stack up with a vast body of legal opinion, including from the high court of Australia and the Australian Senate. Australia established the Nauru detention centre and maintains effective control over its operations. Serious allegations that occur at the centre are a matter for Australia both as a matter of domestic and international law.

Investigating allegations of sexual abuse or assaults

Dutton: We’ve been adamant we want to treat people rightly, we will investigate. I’ve been clear from day one I won’t tolerate one incidence of sexual abuse or any abuse, whether it’s towards a child, female, or male, on Nauru, in Manus.

Many concerns have been raised about the capacity of the Nauruan police force to investigate allegations of abuse and sexual assault. The internal investigations of the companies on the island has also been criticised, because they essentially involve organisations investigating their own staff over allegations of assaults. As a consequence, there is doubt over the effectiveness of the investigating processes set up on Nauru in the absence of other independent oversight.

It’s unclear whether many of the allegations contained in the Nauru files have ever been appropriately dealt with. The reporting of serious allegations is flawed, and incidents are regularly downgraded in seriousness. While the details of a number of cases of child abuse and sexual assault were put forward to the Australian parliament during a Senate inquiry in 2015, the Guardian’s analysis has shown that a number of reports contained in the Nauru files were not disclosed.



While Dutton says he won’t tolerate a single incident of sexual abuse, the Nauru files show that allegations continued to be levelled right up to the most recent reports published by the Guardian.