This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jun/23/dual-nationals-involved-in-terrorism-will-have-citizenship-revoked-abbott-says

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Dual nationals involved in terrorism will have citizenship revoked, Abbott says Dual nationals involved in terrorism will have citizenship revoked, Abbott says
(about 1 hour later)
Dual nationals who have gone overseas and have “serious involvement” with a terrorist group will be deemed to have renounced their Australian citizenship under proposed new laws, Tony Abbott has said.Dual nationals who have gone overseas and have “serious involvement” with a terrorist group will be deemed to have renounced their Australian citizenship under proposed new laws, Tony Abbott has said.
The prime minister’s comments confirm a shift from the government’s original plan, which would have given the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, discretion to decide such revocations. Several ministers and senior lawyers raised concerns about the constitutionality of that proposal given its potential to undercut the role of the courts.The prime minister’s comments confirm a shift from the government’s original plan, which would have given the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, discretion to decide such revocations. Several ministers and senior lawyers raised concerns about the constitutionality of that proposal given its potential to undercut the role of the courts.
Abbott has yet to spell out exactly which conduct would be captured by the “automatic” revocation provisions, saying the details would be clear in legislation presented to parliament on Wednesday.Abbott has yet to spell out exactly which conduct would be captured by the “automatic” revocation provisions, saying the details would be clear in legislation presented to parliament on Wednesday.
He revealed, however, that the government would investigate whether the proposed citizenship revocation could be applied retrospectively to people who have already been convicted in Australia of terrorism offences.He revealed, however, that the government would investigate whether the proposed citizenship revocation could be applied retrospectively to people who have already been convicted in Australia of terrorism offences.
The government announced on Tuesday that the changes to the Citizenship Act would have two elements relating to dual nationals, one being “revocation by conduct” and the other being “revocation by conviction”. The government announced on Tuesday that the changes to the Citizenship Act would have two elements relating to dual nationals, one being “renunciation by conduct” and the other being “revocation by conviction”.
The revocation by conduct involves an extension of section 35 of the act, which has never been used but says “a person ceases to be an Australian citizen if the person: (a) is a national or citizen of a foreign country; and (b) serves in the armed forces of a country at war with Australia”.The revocation by conduct involves an extension of section 35 of the act, which has never been used but says “a person ceases to be an Australian citizen if the person: (a) is a national or citizen of a foreign country; and (b) serves in the armed forces of a country at war with Australia”.
Abbott said the addition to section 35 would “reflect modern conditions where often people don’t go and fight against us in a foreign army, they fight against us in a terrorist group”. Such conduct – targeted at people who are overseas – would lead to revocation “automatically by action of law”.Abbott said the addition to section 35 would “reflect modern conditions where often people don’t go and fight against us in a foreign army, they fight against us in a terrorist group”. Such conduct – targeted at people who are overseas – would lead to revocation “automatically by action of law”.
“If based on appropriate advice, the [immigration] minister becomes aware of a forfeiture under the act, the minister will inform, as best he or she can, the individual in question, that citizenship is forfeited under the relevant section of the act,” Abbott said.“If based on appropriate advice, the [immigration] minister becomes aware of a forfeiture under the act, the minister will inform, as best he or she can, the individual in question, that citizenship is forfeited under the relevant section of the act,” Abbott said.
“The role of the minister is not adjudication, it’s notification. It is the law, the law itself, it will be the operation of the law that actually strips people of their citizenship rather than the ministerial decision as such. If, however, the person so affected believes that there is some problem, this matter will be legally reviewable, as we have said all along.”“The role of the minister is not adjudication, it’s notification. It is the law, the law itself, it will be the operation of the law that actually strips people of their citizenship rather than the ministerial decision as such. If, however, the person so affected believes that there is some problem, this matter will be legally reviewable, as we have said all along.”
Asked what kind of conduct would be captured by the provision – such as whether it would be confined to taking up arms or whether it would also include financing and recruiting for terrorist groups – he said: “There will be a series of provisions in the legislation to specify the kind of conduct that is covered, but in broad terms, it is serious involvement with a terrorist group.”Asked what kind of conduct would be captured by the provision – such as whether it would be confined to taking up arms or whether it would also include financing and recruiting for terrorist groups – he said: “There will be a series of provisions in the legislation to specify the kind of conduct that is covered, but in broad terms, it is serious involvement with a terrorist group.”
Abbott suggested the revocations would not necessarily affect all groups proscribed as terrorist organisations under Australian law.Abbott suggested the revocations would not necessarily affect all groups proscribed as terrorist organisations under Australian law.
He said the legislation would give Dutton “the opportunity to specify from amongst that of list terrorist organisations ... because some of those currently proscribed, while they are terrorist organisations and we don’t like them, are not particularly aiming at us”.He said the legislation would give Dutton “the opportunity to specify from amongst that of list terrorist organisations ... because some of those currently proscribed, while they are terrorist organisations and we don’t like them, are not particularly aiming at us”.
The second aspect of the proposed legislation relates to revocation of citizenship after someone has been convicted of a terrorism offence. This provision is more likely to be applied to people who are in Australia than the automatic revocation element, Abbott said.The second aspect of the proposed legislation relates to revocation of citizenship after someone has been convicted of a terrorism offence. This provision is more likely to be applied to people who are in Australia than the automatic revocation element, Abbott said.
“If you are convicted of a terrorist offence, there will be an assumption that your Australian citizenship is forfeited, should you be a dual national,” Abbott said.“If you are convicted of a terrorist offence, there will be an assumption that your Australian citizenship is forfeited, should you be a dual national,” Abbott said.
In the case of a conviction-related revocation, Dutton would have the ability “to grant an exemption if there is a law enforcement or security imperative”, a government media release said.In the case of a conviction-related revocation, Dutton would have the ability “to grant an exemption if there is a law enforcement or security imperative”, a government media release said.
The legislation was considered by the cabinet’s national security committee and the full cabinet on Monday and was signed off by the Coalition party room on Tuesday, but the bill will not be available until it is presented to parliament on Wednesday.The legislation was considered by the cabinet’s national security committee and the full cabinet on Monday and was signed off by the Coalition party room on Tuesday, but the bill will not be available until it is presented to parliament on Wednesday.
Abbott said the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security would scrutinise the legislation and provide recommendations in August. He said the government would ask the committee “to consider whether there should be retrospective operation of the new law should it pass the parliament”.Abbott said the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security would scrutinise the legislation and provide recommendations in August. He said the government would ask the committee “to consider whether there should be retrospective operation of the new law should it pass the parliament”.
“As drafted it is prospective, but given that we have a number of dual citizens currently in jail after terrorist convictions, the committee should consider whether it should have retrospective operation at least in those cases,” Abbott said, without revealing how far back it might extend.“As drafted it is prospective, but given that we have a number of dual citizens currently in jail after terrorist convictions, the committee should consider whether it should have retrospective operation at least in those cases,” Abbott said, without revealing how far back it might extend.
“There are people who are dual nationals currently in jail on terrorist offences and at some point in the future they’ll be released and the question will then arise should they be deported.”“There are people who are dual nationals currently in jail on terrorist offences and at some point in the future they’ll be released and the question will then arise should they be deported.”
The government has faced criticism about the process it followed to develop the citizenship proposals, which included a backlash from numerous ministers at a cabinet meeting last month.The government has faced criticism about the process it followed to develop the citizenship proposals, which included a backlash from numerous ministers at a cabinet meeting last month.
But Dutton said the government had achieved “a balance” and argued the process over the past couple of months had been “very thorough”.But Dutton said the government had achieved “a balance” and argued the process over the past couple of months had been “very thorough”.
The attorney general, George Brandis, said the government had considered the details of the proposals but the policy aims had “never been in doubt”.The attorney general, George Brandis, said the government had considered the details of the proposals but the policy aims had “never been in doubt”.
He said the government had an obligation not only to keep the community safe but also to uphold the rule of law and act within the constitution.He said the government had an obligation not only to keep the community safe but also to uphold the rule of law and act within the constitution.
“After a very thorough process of development of this legislation that has involved consultation among others with the solicitor general, I’m satisfied that this legislation achieves that objective as well,” Brandis said.“After a very thorough process of development of this legislation that has involved consultation among others with the solicitor general, I’m satisfied that this legislation achieves that objective as well,” Brandis said.
Abbott confirmed the cabinet’s national security committee had considered changing citizenship laws “in the first half of last year” but made a decision not to pursue it.Abbott confirmed the cabinet’s national security committee had considered changing citizenship laws “in the first half of last year” but made a decision not to pursue it.
“At the time, we decided that it was not to be proceeded with, but of course, a lot of things have changed since then,” he said. “A sensible government has an evolving response to an evolving situation.”“At the time, we decided that it was not to be proceeded with, but of course, a lot of things have changed since then,” he said. “A sensible government has an evolving response to an evolving situation.”
The then immigration minister, Scott Morrison, told broadcaster Ray Hadley in January 2014 that the government was looking “right now” at options to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals fighting in Syria.The then immigration minister, Scott Morrison, told broadcaster Ray Hadley in January 2014 that the government was looking “right now” at options to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals fighting in Syria.
At the time, Brandis pointedly refused to confirm such changes were on the agenda.At the time, Brandis pointedly refused to confirm such changes were on the agenda.
Pressed to explain the reason for the 2014 decision, Abbott said he was “not going to give an endless commentary on process” but the legislation would be “the culmination of a very long and quite exhaustive process”.Pressed to explain the reason for the 2014 decision, Abbott said he was “not going to give an endless commentary on process” but the legislation would be “the culmination of a very long and quite exhaustive process”.
Despite suggestions last week that the finalised legislation would not return to the full cabinet for sign-off, Abbott said he had sought such an endorsement “given the significance” of the issue.Despite suggestions last week that the finalised legislation would not return to the full cabinet for sign-off, Abbott said he had sought such an endorsement “given the significance” of the issue.
Labor is due to receive a government briefing on the legislation on Wednesday, but has offered its in-principle support to modernising section 35 of the Citizenship Act.Labor is due to receive a government briefing on the legislation on Wednesday, but has offered its in-principle support to modernising section 35 of the Citizenship Act.
The opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said Labor still had not seen the legislation but asked why it had taken the government 18 months to bring it to parliament.The opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said Labor still had not seen the legislation but asked why it had taken the government 18 months to bring it to parliament.
“Government ministers have been talking about this for 18 months … this has been a tortured process from within the ranks of the government,” he said.“Government ministers have been talking about this for 18 months … this has been a tortured process from within the ranks of the government,” he said.
“Labor is hoping when we look at this legislation, that we have already had a win, that we’ve already moderated what might have been a truly unenforceable, unjudiciable law.“Labor is hoping when we look at this legislation, that we have already had a win, that we’ve already moderated what might have been a truly unenforceable, unjudiciable law.
“It is in no national security interest for the government to put up a law for political purposes which couldn’t actually be enforced. For us the real enemy is terrorism; it is not the government.”“It is in no national security interest for the government to put up a law for political purposes which couldn’t actually be enforced. For us the real enemy is terrorism; it is not the government.”
Labor’s immigration spokesman, Richard Marles, said the party would “work through the legislation in a bipartisan, constructive way once it is introduced into the parliament”.Labor’s immigration spokesman, Richard Marles, said the party would “work through the legislation in a bipartisan, constructive way once it is introduced into the parliament”.
“Citizenship is a privilege, not a right and any dual national seeking to harm the Australian people by joining a terrorist group such as Daesh [another term for Isis] should no longer be afforded our nation’s citizenship,” Marles said.“Citizenship is a privilege, not a right and any dual national seeking to harm the Australian people by joining a terrorist group such as Daesh [another term for Isis] should no longer be afforded our nation’s citizenship,” Marles said.
The Coalition has yet to make a decision on potential changes targeting sole Australian nationals who may be able to apply for citizenship elsewhere. More than 40 Coalition backbenchers signed a letter backing revocation in such cases, but concerns have been raised about the potential to leave people stateless.The Coalition has yet to make a decision on potential changes targeting sole Australian nationals who may be able to apply for citizenship elsewhere. More than 40 Coalition backbenchers signed a letter backing revocation in such cases, but concerns have been raised about the potential to leave people stateless.
Abbott said the government had been advised that as many as half of the 120 Australians fighting in for terrorist groups in the Middle East were dual nationals.Abbott said the government had been advised that as many as half of the 120 Australians fighting in for terrorist groups in the Middle East were dual nationals.
The question of how to deal with the remainder who were sole nationals, he said, would be considered in the consultations currently undertaken by government MPs Philip Ruddock and Concetta Fierravanti-Wells.The question of how to deal with the remainder who were sole nationals, he said, would be considered in the consultations currently undertaken by government MPs Philip Ruddock and Concetta Fierravanti-Wells.
“I expect that in the months to come the government will have further legislation in this area,” Abbott said.“I expect that in the months to come the government will have further legislation in this area,” Abbott said.