If new Australian citizenship laws were to mirror UK powers, what would change? | Australia news | The Guardian

Foreshadowing the Australian government’s plans to follow British (and Canadian) revocation policy:

This [revocation] power has three key limitations: first, it can only be used where the serious offence was committed before they became an Australian citizen. Second, it only applies to citizens by conferral, adoption or descent – which means it doesn’t apply to citizens who are citizens of Australia by birth. And third, the revocation can usually only occur for dual citizens, because the minister is not permitted to allow a person to be stateless.

These laws are already set to be expanded slightly by a bill introduced by the previous immigration minister, Scott Morrison, that would make it easier for the minister to revoke citizenship where fraud has been used to obtain it.

In an opinion piece for the Australian on Monday, Liberal MP Andrew Nikolic foreshadowed areas that may provide some indication of what the prime minister will put forward next week.

He wrote that “Those who persist in associating themselves with terrorist causes must be identified and wherever possible ejected from the state.” He said that “many would argue” that “even Australian-born citizens forfeit their right to be considered Australian.” And he referred to the British example of allowing citizenship to be temporarily suspended – even for non-dual citizens – which could circumvent the statelessness issue.

These statements all go directly to overcoming the three limitations to the revocation powers, and suggest the government is considering adopting a system more like the powers available in Britain.

If new citizenship laws were to mirror UK powers, what would change? | Australia news | The Guardian.