It follows the PNG Supreme Court's rejection of an application by more than 300 refugees and asylum seekers on what have been termed "technicalities."
That application came after an earlier PNG Supreme Court ruling found holding people on Manus Island breached their constitutional rights to personal liberty and was illegal.
Asylum seekers and their lawyers say they are disappointed after the PNG Supreme Court dismissed an application to send asylum seekers on Manus Island to Australia.
Lawyer Ben Lomai says it is a major setback but the decision was only based on technicalities.
He has told the A-B-C detainees plan to refile the application.
"The dismissal, or the strikeout, is basically on technicalities. We are disappointed at this stage, but, at the same time, it gives us much room as well to come back to court."
The case was rejected because the group's main lawyer, not the actual claimants, had signed the court filing documents.
The plan now is to return to Manus Island to collect the signatures and relaunch the application.
Mr Lomai says it had been impossible to access the men.
"Nobody can even access the centre, including the lawyers -- the journalists, the lawyers and even some other international organisations. So that's the reason why, when we got instruction, it was done covertly."
A 24-year-old Sudanese asylum seeker named Aziz has been held on Manus Island for three years and three months.
He has told SBS he is overwhelmed that the application has been denied.
"Well, I feel devastated. Not only me, but all of us here, we feel devastated. We've reached a point where we can't even eat or we can't even talk to each another."
A ruling in favour of the 302 detainees would have meant ordering the PNG and Australian governments to transfer them to Australia within 30 days.
The Australian government has repeatedly declared none of those on Manus Island, nor Nauru, who tried to reach Australia on people-smuggling boats will be allowed into Australia.
But Aziz is urging the Australian government to change its mind.
"If we did commit any crimes -- which means we come to your country illegally -- all right, it's enough. Three years and three months is enough. You shouldn't keep us here for four years, or five years. It's really against the international law."
The Human Rights Law Centre's director of legal advocacy, Daniel Webb, says the PNG Supreme Court case could answer some important rights-based questions.
"We've seen the PNG Supreme Court previously say that the facility is illegal, but the question is what happens to the innocent men trapped inside it. Now that question hasn't been answered by the Australian government. It hasn't been answered by the Papua New Guinean government. At some point, it may be answered by the Papua New Guinean Supreme Court, and, hopefully, that day is soon."
So far, no third country has been found willing to accept any of the detainees.
New Zealand has been mentioned as a possibility, as has Costa Rica in Central America.
Immigration Minister Peter Dutton said last month that the Government continued to negotiate with unspecified third countries to settle those on Nauru and Manus.
But Asylum Seeker Resource Centre spokeswoman Pamela Curr says, in the meantime, she is desperately concerned for the mental health of hundreds of men.
"This is a real problem for this Government. These men are in a suspended state of limbo. They have no future. And the Government is pretending they have no past."
