Karnal wrote on Jun 15
th, 2015 at 1:00pm:
Soren wrote on Jun 15
th, 2015 at 12:07pm:
Karnal wrote on Jun 15
th, 2015 at 12:36am:
Soren wrote on Jun 14
th, 2015 at 6:33pm:
Karnal wrote on Jun 14
th, 2015 at 5:38pm:
Soren wrote on Jun 14
th, 2015 at 4:31pm:
Karnal wrote on Jun 14
th, 2015 at 4:15pm:
Soren wrote on Jun 14
th, 2015 at 3:41pm:
Karnal wrote on Jun 14
th, 2015 at 3:04pm:
The person this legislation applies to is you.
I am not a dual citizen, nor am I fighting with or support Islamic terrorists.
How the hell would it apply to me?
Ministerial discretion can apply to
any dual citizen. Again, no one needs to be convicted of anything.
Nonsense. You have to support proscribed terrorist organisations. The fact of your dual citizenship alone is not enough.
You don’t have to do a thing, old boy, they just need to put an article in the Tele saying you did.
Remember Hanif? He gave his brother a SIM card. Remember Cornelia Rau? She was mentally ill. If dual citizens, such suspects would be subject to the minister’s whims under the proposed legislation. There would be no right of appeal.
Executive powers, old chap. You pointed this out yourself.
It is quite forseeable that you could be caught up in some sweep - mistaken perhaps, but where there is smoke there is fire. If a dual citizen, it’d be back to the old country for you.
Better not grow a beard, old boy - just to be on.the safe side.
Bollock, PB, on stilts.
Show me ONE person who was unlawfully deported. Hanif and Rau was a lawyers' picnic with huge compos. No minister got his way in those cases.
So gissa case where your scenarios
actually played out.
All in good time, dear boy. The legislation is yet to be writ.
So Hanif and Rau are irrelevant for now.
That's one of your fastest comedowns. (Or is it godowns?)
No speaka the Danish, old chap. If I may ask - are you in favour of legislation that cancels citizenship? Should there be any limits on such legislation?
I'm curious.
The legislation will define the circumstances in which the minister may act. They will be fairly narrow circumstances and will focus on what used to be called treason and similar offences relating to membership and support for proscribed organisations. A separate legislation manages what those proscribed organisations and activities are.
The oath of allegiance requires that those who receive citizenship by conferral uphold the laws of Australia. If you break your oath by breaking relevant laws, your citizenship should be revoked. Even if you have only Australian citizenship, your rights can and should be curtailed even though you are not rendered stateless.
How things are now:
If you became a citizen by application you can have your citizenship taken away if you are found to have committed a serious criminal offence prior to gaining citizenship. Australian citizenship can be revoked if:
you have been convicted of making a false statement or representation in relation to your application to become an Australian citizen
you are convicted of a serious criminal offence at any time prior to becoming a citizen involving a sentence of 12 months or more
your approval to become an Australian citizen was gained as a result of migration-related fraud
your approval to become an Australian citizen was gained as a result of third party fraud; for example, fraudulent conduct by a migration agent in the citizenship application
it would be contrary to the public interest for you to remain an Australian citizen.
An Australian citizen by birth cannot have their Australian citizenship revoked. Similarly, a person conferred citizenship, after fully disclosing all relevant factors, cannot have their Australian citizenship revoked.
People who have their citizenship revoked can be removed from Australia.
http://www.citizenship.gov.au/current/losing_citizenship/These parameters will be broadened by the new legislation.
Forum
Pages: 
The conversation about revoking Australian citizen (Read 6389 times)
