Bill bolsters home affairs minister’s ability to revoke citizenship of people convicted of terrorism offences, regardless of length of sentence

A Coalition bill to lower the threshold for revoking Australian citizenship would expose 18 people convicted of terrorist offences to that penalty, according to departmental information.

The home affairs department has described the new powers proposed by Peter Dutton as a “key counter-terrorism tool” in a submission to a parliamentary inquiry but revealed currently just five people in prison and 13 who have served their sentence would be at risk of losing Australian citizenship.

In November, the government proposed to give the home affairs minister the power to strip Australian citizenship from people convicted of any terrorism offence, removing the current requirement that the person had been sentenced to six years or more in prison.

The bill has been opposed by the Law Council of Australia, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees on the basis it infringes international conventions against rendering people stateless.

In its submission to the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security, the department revealed that since the law was changed in 2015, 12 people have “ceased to be Australian citizens as a result of terrorism-related conduct” that the Citizenship Act defines as repudiating allegiance to Australia.

But it said that nobody had their citizenship removed by a separate ministerial power triggered by a conviction for terrorism or related offences where the person had been sentenced to six or more years in prison. For people convicted between December 2005 and 2015, the threshold is 10 years or more.

Greens 'won't let' Morrison force councils to hold Australia Day citizenship ceremonies Read more

The department submitted that removing both those thresholds with retrospective application will “bolster the minister’s ability to cease an individual’s Australian citizenship where they have been convicted of a relevant terrorism offence, regardless of length of sentence”.

“This includes persons who have been released into the community, but either continue to prescribe to a violent extremist ideology or subsequently re-adopt such an ideology, and are thus of concern to authorities,” it said.

The department said the amendments “may give the minister the power to cease the Australian citizenship of a further 18 individuals”, but did not say how many of those have dual citizenship. The proposed changes also lower the bar by requiring that the minister only be “reasonably satisfied” the person would not become stateless.

The department argued that lowering the threshold for revocation of citizenship may “provide additional deterrence” to would-be offenders and that the number of people eligible for revocation may increase over time.

The UNHCR submitted that the minister could revoke Australian citizenship on the basis a person is eligible to become a citizen of another country “rather than in fact being a national of another country at the time of the determination, as is currently the case”.

“Statelessness could result if the minister takes the view that an individual would not become stateless provided they take steps to confirm or claim an entitlement to another nationality,” it said.

The UNHCR said the proposed amendments “create a heightened risk that an individual could be rendered stateless” contrary to Australia’s obligations under the 1961 statelessness convention.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils submitted the government had failed to show the proposal will make Australia safer.

It argued the case of 27-year-old Isis fighter Neil Prakash – who was disowned by both Australia and Fiji – “highlights very clearly how problematic” the proposal to require only the minister’s “satisfaction” of dual citizenship would be.

Professor Helen Irving, from the University of Sydney law school, warned the law could be struck down by the high court, on the same grounds it found removing the vote from people convicted of offences carrying a sentence of less than three years prison to be unconstitutional.