Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I will respond to comments the minister has made. Unfortunately, in his haste to defend himself, the Attorney-General hasn't given Minister Watt the complete brief, so perhaps he does want to go back and ask the Attorney-General for the correct brief. Minister, you weren't referring to the laws that I referred to. You were talking about—and I assume the Attorney-General's office guy has gone and given you this to read out—the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Strengthening the Citizenship Loss Provisions) Bill 2018. You continued to work with us in a bipartisan manner. I was making reference to the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2020. As I said at the commencement of my comments, we can safely disregard anything that the minister has just said about legislation that was never considered by the High Court and that, indeed, never became law. These are the correct comments in relation to what the Attorney-General said about the legislation. Perhaps the Attorney can quickly update his brief for you and rush it in so you can correct the record. Just to ensure we're all on the same page, I want to quote:

Labor members welcome the move to a ministerial decision-making model of citizenship cessation.

And as I said, just for the benefit of Hansard, in his second reading speech on the citizen cessation bill the then shadow Attorney-General described Labor as 'fully supporting the move to a ministerial decision-making model'. That's just for the record to ensure the Attorney-General's comments are correctly recorded despite the brief that he clearly had raced into the chamber for Minister Watt to read out.

In terms of the legislation that we have currently before us, the Senate would be aware that it is now more than one month since the Benbrika decision. On 1 November this year—over one month ago now—together with the Leader of the Opposition and Senator Paterson, I wrote to the Albanese Labor government, and we actually requested that they bring forward this legislation. I'm going to read the letter into Hansard because of the rhetoric that we are hearing from the minister and indeed from the press conference that has been held earlier today. There's quite a bit of press in relation to that press conference unfortunately, and I have to say it's not faring well for the Attorney-General. This is the letter addressed to the Prime Minister, the Minister for Home Affairs and, at that stage, the Acting Attorney-General, and we said:

Dear Prime Minister, Minister and Acting Attorney-General,

We write in relation to the High Court's decision in the matter of Benbrika v Minister for Home Affairs, which was handed down earlier today.

Abdul Nacer Benbrika is a convicted terrorist who planned to conduct violent attacks against Australians on Australian soil. Mr Benbrika held both Australian and Algerian citizenship. He was convicted of serious criminal offences by due process of law following a trial by jury in the Victorian Supreme Court.

Shortly before the expiry of criminal Mr Benbrika's sentence, in November 2020, the former Coalition Government cancelled Mr Benbrika's Australian citizenship under section 36D of the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, acting in the best interests of all Australians.

The effect of today's High Court decision is to render section 36D of the Australian Citizenship Act invalid, and restore Mr Benbrika's Australian citizenship.

Section 36D of the Australian Citizenship Act was introduced with bipartisan support in 2020, by the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation)Act 2020. The intent of that Act was to allow the Australian Government to cancel the citizenship of convicted terrorists who had repudiated their allegiance to Australia, working within constitutional bounds. The drafting of the legislation was informed by the best constitutional advice available.

One consequence of the High Court's ruling is that convicted terrorists may remain entitled to the privileges of Australian citizenship despite repudiating their allegiance to Australia—even if they have actively planned to attack and kill other Australians, on Australian soil.

The Australian people should not be asked to tolerate this risk.

We ask that you bring forward legislation to address the High Court's ruling as a matter of urgency, and reinstate the Government's power to cancel the citizenship of convicted terrorists in appropriate cases. In the interests of all Australians, the Coalition will of course work cooperatively with the Government to ensure such laws can be passed without delay.

We note that in October 2022 the Albanese Government publicly committed to introducing new legislation to restore these powers but detail on the proposed legislation is yet to be released.

The Government must pursue every available avenue to ensure the safety of the Australian people. We note that, at present, Mr Benbrika remains in prison pursuant to a continuing detention order sought by the former Coalition Government in 2020. However, that order will expire this year, and if a further order is not granted by a court, Mr Benbrika may soon be released into the Australian community.

Just to confirm, that was the letter that I, Senator Paterson and the Leader of the Opposition sent to the Prime Minister, the Minister for Home Affairs and the Acting Attorney-General on 1 November.

That was, of course, the day that the High Court handed down its decision. We are now in December, so we are now five weeks past the date of the letter that we wrote and 18 months after the Alexander decision, after which, as we said in our letter, the government committed to restoring this regime. As I've said, in October 2022 the Albanese government publicly committed to introducing new legislation to restore these powers, but the detail has never been released.

Can I ask a question—unfortunately, it's going to have to be taken on notice, because I have a number of questions—on the procedural history of this bill in terms of when the policy work commenced, when the drafting instructions were given and when the drafting actually commenced? As to Mr Benbrika, though—he is, as we know, Australia's most notorious convicted terrorist offender and in 2008 was found guilty of leading a terrorist cell that plotted to blow up Australian landmarks—my questions are: Does this bill cover Abdul Nacer Benbrika? What consideration was given to these laws covering Abdul Nacer Benbrika? Does this bill cover anyone who has previously had their citizenship removed? What consideration was given to these laws covering anyone else who had previously had their citizenship removed? Mr Benbrika is currently subject, as I've stated, to a continuing detention order obtained by the former coalition government in 2020. It is due to expire on 24 December—so shortly. In the event that the bill doesn't cover him, what is the government doing about his case? Will you apply for a new continuing detention order or take some other step, or will Australians wake up on 25 December to the very nasty Christmas present that one of our most notorious terrorist offenders is being released back onto our streets?