D: Someone who moves people illegally between countries for money.

People smuggling, like most crimes occurs because there is a demand for something. In this case people in in one country want to get to another because going to the other country has some benefit. In the case of asylum seekers moving from Indonesia to Australia, the people get a benefit from being in Australia. Firstly, their refugee claims are more likely to be successful because the Australian courts have a more generous definition of refugee than many other places. Secondly, if their claims are successful, Australia offers them a much higher standard of living than elsewhere. The welfare payments in Australia are higher than the wages in most other countries in the world. People can enjoy a higher standard of living on welfare in Australia than working full time in most other countries.

Hence people want to come to Australia illegally, and they are willing to pay people (illegally) to come here. People smugglers, just like travel agents, provide advice and make travel arrangements for a price.

It is ridiculous to suggest that the clients of people smugglers are victims of them. In general the asylum seekers do very well out of employing them. There have been cases where the people smugglers have forced the asylum seekers into unsafe passage (unventilated containers which suffocate, overloaded boats which sink and so on), but the people accept this risk.

It is pointless to blame the countries in which people smugglers operate for their actions. If you leave large amounts of wealth in your back-yard for anyone to come and take, it is irrational to blame your neighbor when people trample over his back-yard to get to yours. Indonesia, in particular, has her own problems. Indonesians have no obligation to spend valuable resources on solving problems that Australia has created for herself. The fact that Indonesia profits from this industry, and that corrupt Indonesian police and armed forces are involved in it doesn't help their credibility, but this does not change the fact that they have no obligation to solve the problem.