Dual Citizenship Crisis - s 44(i)

[HAL]

Oops. Too much data.

[Skids]

[David]

Good that intends to try and fight it.

Possibly... or possibly he knows that he's stuffed but wants to drag the matter through the courts for as long as possible to delay the inevitable.

[think positive]

What a terrible loss for Australian democracy. Ludlam has been an outstanding Senator, head and shoulders above most of his kind and his voice of sanity and reason will be sadly missed.

Examle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90K0p-1CCQk

Note that he arrived in Australia as a very young child and had no idea that he was technically also a New Zealand citizen until last week. Note also that he immediately notified the appropriate authorities. (Compare with that dishonest clown Abbott who is still refusing to own up or provide evidence of his citizenship.)

This has to be the ultimate.... I know I'm 50, but I just wet myself

No family album??? was he born in the 14th century?

Actually skids, I thought exactly the same thing. My sister and my parents both got nationalised years ago but I refused to, because I thought exactly that, that I was giving up my British citizenship at the same time. Only when I applied late last year did I realise I get to keep both, unless I choose not too. And I kno others who have said the same thing.

(As for the why, which I always get asked, just because a bit of paper won't change where I was born, so it's just no big deal to me. And yeah I've been told to go back home them a million times! And no I haven't done the test yet, I just got my mums passport from 1970 from my sister yesterday! I sit it in October, that's the earliest! Yes the practice test is a bitch, but I've passed more than I have failed, I'll study the day before! And yes it's full of bullshit!)

[think positive]

Good that intends to try and fight it.

Possibly... or possibly he knows that he's stuffed but wants to drag the matter through the courts for as long as possible to delay the inevitable.

Someone has to test it.

So there is plenty of, can't think of a nicer way to put it, but obvious foreigners on city councils, does the law apply to them too?

[Pies4shaw]

No, it doesn't - Councillors are appointed under State/Territory laws, not under the Commonwealth Constitution.

All of these issues with Commonwealth Senators and Members are a direct consequence of the operation of section 44(i) of the Constitution, which provides that:

"44. Any person who -

(i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power....

shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives."

Why does it need to be tested - its meaning is pretty obvious? It has already been read down to require, in substance, merely that one do everything in one's power to divest oneself of foreign allegiance or entitlement (because some countries simply will not allow a citizen to renounce citizenship). It might require amendment but I can see a reasonably amusing "No" case being run on that one and I doubt that an amendment would succeed.

I suppose it is possible that the High Court will say that he isn't "really" Italian for some reason or other but if he really is an Italian citizen, that's a bit unlikely. In any event, that would be the High Court finding that, on the facts, the provision doesn't apply to his circumstances - I think it's unlikely that the provision will be read down further.

[think positive]

No, it doesn't - Councillors are appointed under State/Territory laws, not under the Commonwealth Constitution.

All of these issues with Commonwealth Senators and Members are a direct consequence of the operation of section 44(i) of the Constitution, which provides that:

"44. Any person who -

(i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power....

shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives."

Why does it need to be tested - its meaning is pretty obvious? It has already been read down to require, in substance, merely that one do everything in one's power to divest oneself of foreign allegiance or entitlement (because some countries simply will not allow a citizen to renounce citizenship). It might require amendment but I can see a reasonably amusing "No" case being run on that one and I doubt that an amendment would succeed.

I suppose it is possible that the High Court will say that he isn't "really" Italian for some reason or other but if he really is an Italian citizen, that's a bit unlikely. In any event, that would be the High Court finding that, on the facts, the provision doesn't apply to his circumstances - I think it's unlikely that the provision will be read down further.

Thanks for the info.

Can just see them all scrambling to check now!

I can see why the rule is there,

[David]

[stui magpie]

I actually do support it and agree with P4S.

If you want to be elected to represent people of Australia in the federal Parliament of Australia, your allegiance should be to Australia and having citizenship of another country means it isn't, or at least that you have a conflict of interest.

[Pies4shaw]

I actually do support it and agree with P4S.

If you want to be elected to represent people of Australia in the federal Parliament of Australia, your allegiance should be to Australia and having citizenship of another country means it isn't, or at least that you have a conflict of interest.

I expressed an opinion on the law and a guess about the likelihood of a successful referendum to change it. I wasn't stating any normative position.

[stui magpie]

I actually do support it and agree with P4S.

If you want to be elected to represent people of Australia in the federal Parliament of Australia, your allegiance should be to Australia and having citizenship of another country means it isn't, or at least that you have a conflict of interest.

I expressed an opinion on the law and a guess about the likelihood of a successful referendum to change it. I wasn't stating any normative position.

OK, I agree with your opinion. I wasn't intending to imply that you agreed with the rest of my post.

[ronrat]

Plenty of people (and I could be one) can apply for an Irish Passport because I had a grandparent born there. Same in the UK. It nakes it easier getting around Europe, Doesn't mean you renounce Australian Citizenship.

The middle east is full of people with people who hold dual passports. If the balloon goes up they yell and scream and Australia is suddenly required to get them out. But then it makes it easy to cancel their Australian Passport if they turn up in some ISIL video.

When working for Defence I once provided some surveillance equipment for the NSW Police to track a pedophile up Moree way. He booked a ticket to Vietnam. Within an hour of the plane leaving they had raided his home and found shot dogs, heaps of kiddie porn and a booby tracked home. They disarmed his home, notified the Viet authorities and they cancelled his Australian passport. He was not a citizen and had left on a Croatian passport although he had never lived there. The Vietnamese caught him within hours of him being there having paid a child pimp to get young kids. His first call was to the Australian Embassy who said not our problem. When he gets out in a few years he can not return to Australia and will be deported from Vietnam.

The easy way to fix this would be to say if you must not have more than one National passport.

[watt price tully]

Was Malcolm Roberts born In Iran?

Why won't he show his birth certificate?

Is he a Muslim?

Did he enter Parliament as a non Australian that is, as a Brit?

[Jezza]

The dual citizenship circus continues.

Barnaby Joyce is a NZ citizen.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-14/p ... 14/8802990

[Wokko]

Libs taking this one to the High Court. No surprise because of their slim margin in the House of Reps.

If Joyce is turfed would it mean a by-election?