A Citzen of Australia

Abdul Nacer Benbrika free, to be a [plotting] ISLAMIST, in Australia.




IMAGE.....
https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/5f2c89d972b35df4e6a06314d605f053?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=413&cropW=621&xPos=0&yPos=55&width=862&height=575



Convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika wins High Court bid to restore his Australian citizenship
By Patrick Bell
Posted 55m ago  [2023-Nov-01  Wed]
One of Australia's most notorious convicted terrorists, Abdul Nacer Benbrika, has won his High Court bid to restore his Australian citizenship.........
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-01/terrorist-abdul-benbrika-citizenship-restored-in-high-court/103047952



.



I have been stating this [below] for some YEARS,
.....as a statement of fact.

And what is stated, is as true today, as it was the first day that i said it.....

------- >


Yadda said.....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1570367530/2#2

Quote:

MY ARGUMENT; 1/ Every moslem is a follower of ISLAM. 2/ And ISLAM is a philosophy which mandates that its followers must fight and kill people, who reject ISLAM, and reject the primacy of ISLAMIC law. And, a new attack is going to occur whenever      any individual moslem [living among us, in Australia] decides that 'now' is a good moment for him to prove his devotion to ISLAM and to Allah.

Yeah, yeah,    .....it was a typo.

A typo does not mean that i am illiterate.       ......just means that i made a mistake.     :P

I think this is as stupid a decision by the High Court as the one about foreign born Aborigines who never held Australian citizenship cannot, nevertheless, be deported.


Cancelling citizenship is not a punishment. It is the withdrawal of a privilege that would not have been granted AFTER he was convicted.
The bastards is also an Algerian citizen.


https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_m90-2022


In June 2022 the high court restored the Australian citizenship of Delil Alexander, a Turkish citizen who was assessed to have joined Islamic State. The court found powers to strip citizenship gave the minister a role in adjudging and punishing criminal guilt, something that should be reserved only for courts.

On Wednesday the high court similarly found in Benbrika’s favour in what it described as a “sequel” to Alexander’s case, ruling that section 36D of the Citizenship Act is invalid as it confers powers to the minister that should be exclusive to the judiciary.

In a dissenting ruling, justice Simon Steward agreed with the commonwealth that it has “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”.

Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”.

Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”.

Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle


Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre.

Terrorists should be hanged in front of parliament
and shown on prime time TV in 4K with closeups.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZTe-_yqmhQ

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/151/888/113/original/efe3735458d8ae0f.png

Frank wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 3:02pm:

I think this is as stupid a decision by the High Court as the one about foreign born Aborigines who never held Australian citizenship cannot, nevertheless, be deported. Cancelling citizenship is not a punishment. It is the withdrawal of a privilege that would not have been granted AFTER he was convicted. The bastards is also an Algerian citizen. https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_m90-2022 In June 2022 the high court restored the Australian citizenship of Delil Alexander, a Turkish citizen who was assessed to have joined Islamic State. The court found powers to strip citizenship gave the minister a role in adjudging and punishing criminal guilt, something that should be reserved only for courts. On Wednesday the high court similarly found in Benbrika’s favour in what it described as a “sequel” to Alexander’s case, ruling that section 36D of the Citizenship Act is invalid as it confers powers to the minister that should be exclusive to the judiciary. In a dissenting ruling, justice Simon Steward agreed with the commonwealth that it has “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”. Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”. Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”. Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre.

Do tell me what the reason for today's outcome was.  There were six Judges in the majority.

Lovely to know we have our very own Jurist whose legal knowledge outweighs all six of those idiots, ey?

Deport him to Israel - they will accept him.

Aussie wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 3:50pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 3:02pm: I think this is as stupid a decision by the High Court as the one about foreign born Aborigines who never held Australian citizenship cannot, nevertheless, be deported. Cancelling citizenship is not a punishment. It is the withdrawal of a privilege that would not have been granted AFTER he was convicted. The bastards is also an Algerian citizen. https://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_m90-2022 In June 2022 the high court restored the Australian citizenship of Delil Alexander, a Turkish citizen who was assessed to have joined Islamic State. The court found powers to strip citizenship gave the minister a role in adjudging and punishing criminal guilt, something that should be reserved only for courts. On Wednesday the high court similarly found in Benbrika’s favour in what it described as a “sequel” to Alexander’s case, ruling that section 36D of the Citizenship Act is invalid as it confers powers to the minister that should be exclusive to the judiciary. In a dissenting ruling, justice Simon Steward agreed with the commonwealth that it has “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”. Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”. Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”. Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre. Do tell me what the reason for today's outcome was.  There were six Judges in the majority. Lovely to know we have our very own Jurist whose legal knowledge outweighs all six of those idiots, ey?

It was for stupid reasons, as I already said - now highlighted for silly Arsies.

You talk, silly Arrsie, as if every decision by all High/Supreme Courts were indisputably correct and beyond criticism.

Section 36D does not confer exclusively judicial power on Minister (RS [47]-[56])
11. Applying Alexander at [96], s 36D does not purport to confer an exclusively judicial
power on the Minister. It is, therefore, valid. Three factors support that conclusion.
12. First, the Minister’s power to impose citizenship cessation is enlivened only where a
court has found the relevant facts, and where, as a result, the person has been found guilty
of an offence that is inimical to Australia’s interests. Consequently, s 36D does not
exhibit the vice of s 36B. The applicant’s submissions that the Minister has a
“substantial” fact-finding role under s 36D(1)(c) and (d) must be rejected (cf AS [41]-
[43]; ASR [8]-[9]). That construction is contrary to the text of the provision. Further,
this Court rejected a similar argument in Minogue (2018) 264 CLR 252 (Vol 6, Tab 52).
13. Second, no Australian legislation has historically involved a court making the order for
citizenship cessation. By contrast, there is a long history of legislation providing for
citizenship cessation by executive decision, following a conviction by a court (see, eg,
Nationality Act 1920 (Cth), s 12(2)(b) (Vol 3, Tab 14)); and by automatic operation of
law (see, eg, Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948 (Cth), s 19 (Vol 3, Tab 15)). That
historical practice supports the line identified in Alexander at [96].
14. Third, certain matters to which the Minister must have regard under s 36D are not well
suited to judicial determination (let alone appropriate to be classified as matters
exclusively for judicial evaluation): see, eg, ss 36D(1)(c)-(d), 36E(2)(h).
15. Alternatively, this Court should recognise that, at least where a person has been convicted
and sentenced by a court for an offence within the narrow category of offences that engage
s 36D, imposition of citizenship cessation as a consequence of such offending otherwise
than by a Ch III court is permissible as an exception to the Lim principle.
https://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/cases/06-Melbourne/m90-2022/Benbrika-MHA_Res_OOA.pdf

Frank wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 3:02pm:

Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”. Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”. Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre.

They should cancel his citizenship and deport him.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 4:46pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 3:02pm: Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”. Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”. Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre. They should cancel his citizenship and deport him.

Well, that's what the High Court decision overturned.

Frank wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 4:48pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 4:46pm: Frank wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 3:02pm: Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”. Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”. Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre. They should cancel his citizenship and deport him. Well, that's what the High Court decision overturned.

The minister should step in and do it.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 4:53pm:

Frank wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 4:48pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 4:46pm: Frank wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 3:02pm: Steward said the purpose of citizenship cancellation “is not to sanction proscribed conduct” but rather “recognition that by extreme conduct that person has inexorably separated themselves from the people as a community and from Australia itself”. Steward noted findings by the trial judge in 2009 that there was “no evidence” before that court that “Benbrika has, in any way, renounced his commitment to violent jihad and hence to terrorism”. Steward concluded that “cancellation here is simply … acknowledgment of something which has in fact already occurred: a person’s rejection of membership of the Australian body politic”. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/01/abdul-nacer-benbrika-australian-citizenship-convicted-terrorist-wins-high-court-battle Courts do not grant citizenship, the Minister does. But the judges reserve the power to withdraw citizenship to themselves. Bizarre. They should cancel his citizenship and deport him. Well, that's what the High Court decision overturned. The minister should step in and do it.

Well, that he did (Dutton) and that is what was appealed.
The High Court now decided that the legislation that gave the power to the Minister is unconstitutional.

The silly asses (except for Stewart).

Stupid decision.  Get rid of him.  Citizenship is a privilege and if you bite the hand that's taken you in, too bad, off you go.

He has dual citizenship.  Use it.

Black Orchid wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 4:59pm:

Stupid decision.  Get rid of him.  Citizenship is a privilege and if you bite the hand that's taken you in, too bad, off you go. He has dual citizenship.  Use it.

G'day BO, great to see you.

I totally agree. We are becoming too soft in the west.

Here in the UAE, they lock you up, then deport you. That's it.

Then a ban to never to return.

This is the right thing to do. This nambie bambie soft "what about their rights" shite needs to stop.  society breaks down look after it.

Blame the Woke/Media/Democrats for that 'softness'.
They can't and won't discriminate between good and bad unless it has red hair and is a male called Trump.

Jasin wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 6:52pm:

Blame the Woke/Media/Democrats for that 'softness'. They can't and won't discriminate between good and bad unless it has red hair and is a male called Trump.

Firstly, I think this was a very bad decision - he has no right to Australian citizenship.

Secondly, how did the Democrats influence Australia's High Court?   :-/

Super Nova wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 5:35pm:

Black Orchid wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 4:59pm: Stupid decision.  Get rid of him.  Citizenship is a privilege and if you bite the hand that's taken you in, too bad, off you go. He has dual citizenship.  Use it. G'day BO, great to see you. I totally agree. We are becoming too soft in the west. Here in the UAE, they lock you up, then deport you. That's it. Then a ban to never to return. This is the right thing to do. This nambie bambie soft "what about their rights" shite needs to stop.  society breaks down look after it.

The High Court says the legislation is unconstitutional.  There endeth the lesson, girls!

And I doubt you will have much luck selling the UAE judicial system to even Dutton!

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 7:13pm:

Jasin wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 6:52pm: Blame the Woke/Media/Democrats for that 'softness'. They can't and won't discriminate between good and bad unless it has red hair and is a male called Trump. Firstly, I think this was a very bad decision - he has no right to Australian citizenship. Secondly, how did the Democrats influence Australia's High Court?   :-/

They've influenced the ALP - there's a start.

Jasin wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 7:52pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 7:13pm: Jasin wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 6:52pm: Blame the Woke/Media/Democrats for that 'softness'. They can't and won't discriminate between good and bad unless it has red hair and is a male called Trump. Firstly, I think this was a very bad decision - he has no right to Australian citizenship. Secondly, how did the Democrats influence Australia's High Court?   :-/ They've influenced the ALP - there's a start.

How has the ALP influenced the High Court?

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 8:00pm:

Jasin wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 7:52pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 7:13pm: Jasin wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 6:52pm: Blame the Woke/Media/Democrats for that 'softness'. They can't and won't discriminate between good and bad unless it has red hair and is a male called Trump. Firstly, I think this was a very bad decision - he has no right to Australian citizenship. Secondly, how did the Democrats influence Australia's High Court?   :-/ They've influenced the ALP - there's a start. How has the ALP influenced the High Court?

Why are you Gay?

Jasin wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 8:20pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 8:00pm: Jasin wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 7:52pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 7:13pm: Jasin wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 6:52pm: Blame the Woke/Media/Democrats for that 'softness'. They can't and won't discriminate between good and bad unless it has red hair and is a male called Trump. Firstly, I think this was a very bad decision - he has no right to Australian citizenship. Secondly, how did the Democrats influence Australia's High Court?   :-/ They've influenced the ALP - there's a start. How has the ALP influenced the High Court? Why are you Gay?

White flag accepted.

Now you can go back to condoning the slaughter of innocent children.

Rainbow Flag accepted.
Now you can go back to exploiting children for your attention seeking Trolling.

Aussie wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 7:31pm:

Super Nova wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 5:35pm: Black Orchid wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 4:59pm: Stupid decision.  Get rid of him.  Citizenship is a privilege and if you bite the hand that's taken you in, too bad, off you go. He has dual citizenship.  Use it. G'day BO, great to see you. I totally agree. We are becoming too soft in the west. Here in the UAE, they lock you up, then deport you. That's it. Then a ban to never to return. This is the right thing to do. This nambie bambie soft "what about their rights" shite needs to stop.  society breaks down look after it. The High Court says the legislation is unconstitutional.  There endeth the lesson, girls! And I doubt you will have much luck selling the UAE judicial system to even Dutton!

The High Court is not the papacy, Arse. They are not infallible.

Here begineth the lesson for thicko sycophants in taxis.

Unlike the Pope who answers to some Sky Fairy, the High Court answers to no-one and nothing.

It has spoken 6-1.

There endeth the lesson.

Aussie wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 8:53pm:

Unlike the Pope who answers to some Sky Fairy, the High Court answers to no-one and nothing. It has spoken 6-1. There endeth the lesson.

They are not infallible.

Common sense says that we should provide public hangings for terrorists.

Aussie wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 8:53pm:

Unlike the Pope who answers to some Sky Fairy, the High Court answers to no-one and nothing. It has spoken 6-1. There endeth the lesson.

Being the addled prick you are, you misconstrued the point, as you always do, Arrseie.


That's what we keep you for - the Voice of Bewildrered Unreason.



Taxi!!! Get me outa here!

Bobby. wrote on Nov 1^st, 2023 at 8:58pm:

Aussie wrote on Nov 1st, 2023 at 8:53pm: Unlike the Pope who answers to some Sky Fairy, the High Court answers to no-one and nothing. It has spoken 6-1. There endeth the lesson. They are not infallible. Common sense says that we should provide public hangings for terrorists.

One day you're not going to watch where you're going and walk right into and down an open manhole.

Another example of—the many—mistakes that
Australian jurisprudence makes in its manifestly
erroneous decisions across our courts both state
and federal.

Of course this arsewipe should've been deported.


(And our resident forum clown seems to think that
the prime minister can influence the High Court's
rulings.   What a fucking dickhead LOL.)

   

AusGeoff wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2023 at 11:30am:

Another example of—the many—mistakes that Australian jurisprudence makes in its manifestly erroneous decisions across our courts both state and federal. Of course this arsewipe should've been deported. (And our resident forum clown seems to think that the prime minister can influence the High Court's rulings.   What a fucking dickhead LOL.)

He also thinks it's all the fault of the Democrats   ;D

He doesn't even know what country he's in.

Dublin, 2033....🤣🤣🤣🤣


https://twitter.com/M_Rotchburns/status/1720358886555701728