My wonderful progressive High Court: so proud, so brave... (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

wiggins

Forum Veteran
It's wonderful living in Aus with our progressive High Court (Supreme Court for our US cousins).

Apart from making an interesting ruling last year that was based on some kind of magical thinking when they ruled that Mr Love, a white looking criminal born in NZ, and without Australian nationality, could not be deported back home after his criminal offences , like all the other non Aussies get, because he claimed some % aboriginality and thus 'was unable to be alienated from his land', they have now ruled that due to separation of powers the government cannot cancel the passport of a convicted terrorist who was planning on mayhem at the MCG (our Melbourne Cricket Ground sports Mecca ... pun here I think...).

So Johny Jihad, who has never recanted his radicalism, can have another go...

Terrorist wins citizenship battle in High Court​

Michael Pelly

Michael PellyLegal editor
Nov 1, 2023 – 1.36pm

Convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to restore his Australian citizenship, three years after it was cancelled by the Morrison government.
The court said the section of the Migration Act used by then home affairs minister Peter Dutton was constitutionally invalid because it usurped “the exclusively judicial function of punishing criminal guilt”.
9955c5daae3bddae107c4ec11afbb00c8e7f27f8

Terrorism plot: Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to retain his Australian citizenship. ABC
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the government would “examine the ruling and respond appropriately”.
“Quite clearly, there was an issue with the former government’s legislation, which is what this ruling relates to, but when it comes to the legal consequences we will seek advice,” Mr Albanese said.
In another migration case, the court upheld the cancellation of citizenship for British-born Phyllip Jones, after he did not reveal offences against minors on his 1988 application.



Algerian-born Mr Benbrika, 63, was found guilty in 2008 of leading a terror cell that plotted attacks on Melbourne landmarks in 2005, including the AFL grand final at the MCG. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail.
When Mr Benbrika’s sentence expired in November 2020, Mr Dutton cancelled his citizenship and he was placed in immigration detention under continuing detention order. The order is due to expire on December 23.
It was the first time a person had been stripped of their citizenship for a terrorism offence while in Australia. Mr Benbrika had been in Australia since 1989 and a citizen since 1998.
Mr Dutton also stripped citizenship from Delil Alexander, a Turkish-Australian man accused of fighting for ISIS. Mr Alexander lost a High Court challenge last year.
The court rejected the Commonwealth argument that a minister should be “allowed to deprive a person of citizenship involuntarily as punishment following a conviction”.
The lead judgment of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel and Justices Stephen Gageler, Jacqueline Gleeson and Jayne Jagot said: “The Commonwealth parliament cannot repose in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any function of sentencing persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Nor can the Commonwealth parliament vest in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any power to impose additional or further punishment on persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Section 36D(1) [of the Migration Act] purports to vest such a power to impose additional or further punishment in the minister.”
In his dissent, Justice Simon Steward said it had “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”.
In the other migration case, Mr Jones, 73, lost his appeal and will be deported, despite having lived in Australia continuously since 1966.
In 2003, he was convicted of five counts of indecent dealing and indecent assault between 1980 and 2001. He has been in immigration detention since 2022.
The same majority as in Benbrika said “quirks of timing in the commencement and conclusion of criminal proceedings did not allow a person’s prior criminal conduct to remain unconsidered”.
The court also ruled on Wednesday that the Catholic Church should not have been granted a permanent stay in a historical sex abuse case involving a priest in Lismore.
In the 3-2 decision, the majority (Kiefel, Gageler and Jagot) said a permanent stay was “a measure of last resort”.
“The grant of a permanent stay to prevent an abuse of process involves a decision that permitting a matter to go to trial and the rendering of a verdict would be irreconcilable with the administration of justice through the operation of the adversarial system.”
Chief Justice Susan Kiefel.
 

Attachments

  • 1698813556483.jpeg
    1698813556483.jpeg
    941 bytes · Views: 55
  • 1698813556497.jpeg
    1698813556497.jpeg
    2.9 KB · Views: 58

D.O.A.

Elon did nothing wrong
It's wonderful living in Aus with our progressive High Court (Supreme Court for our US cousins).

Apart from making an interesting ruling last year that was based on some kind of magical thinking when they ruled that Mr Love, a white looking criminal born in NZ, and without Australian nationality, could not be deported back home after his criminal offences , like all the other non Aussies get, because he claimed some % aboriginality and thus 'was unable to be alienated from his land', they have now ruled that due to separation of powers the government cannot cancel the passport of a convicted terrorist who was planning on mayhem at the MCG (our Melbourne Cricket Ground sports Mecca ... pun here I think...).

So Johny Jihad, who has never recanted his radicalism, can have another go...

Terrorist wins citizenship battle in High Court​

Michael Pelly

Michael PellyLegal editor
Nov 1, 2023 – 1.36pm

Convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to restore his Australian citizenship, three years after it was cancelled by the Morrison government.
The court said the section of the Migration Act used by then home affairs minister Peter Dutton was constitutionally invalid because it usurped “the exclusively judicial function of punishing criminal guilt”.
9955c5daae3bddae107c4ec11afbb00c8e7f27f8

Terrorism plot: Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to retain his Australian citizenship. ABC
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the government would “examine the ruling and respond appropriately”.
“Quite clearly, there was an issue with the former government’s legislation, which is what this ruling relates to, but when it comes to the legal consequences we will seek advice,” Mr Albanese said.
In another migration case, the court upheld the cancellation of citizenship for British-born Phyllip Jones, after he did not reveal offences against minors on his 1988 application.



Algerian-born Mr Benbrika, 63, was found guilty in 2008 of leading a terror cell that plotted attacks on Melbourne landmarks in 2005, including the AFL grand final at the MCG. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail.
When Mr Benbrika’s sentence expired in November 2020, Mr Dutton cancelled his citizenship and he was placed in immigration detention under continuing detention order. The order is due to expire on December 23.
It was the first time a person had been stripped of their citizenship for a terrorism offence while in Australia. Mr Benbrika had been in Australia since 1989 and a citizen since 1998.
Mr Dutton also stripped citizenship from Delil Alexander, a Turkish-Australian man accused of fighting for ISIS. Mr Alexander lost a High Court challenge last year.
The court rejected the Commonwealth argument that a minister should be “allowed to deprive a person of citizenship involuntarily as punishment following a conviction”.
The lead judgment of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel and Justices Stephen Gageler, Jacqueline Gleeson and Jayne Jagot said: “The Commonwealth parliament cannot repose in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any function of sentencing persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Nor can the Commonwealth parliament vest in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any power to impose additional or further punishment on persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Section 36D(1) [of the Migration Act] purports to vest such a power to impose additional or further punishment in the minister.”
In his dissent, Justice Simon Steward said it had “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”.
In the other migration case, Mr Jones, 73, lost his appeal and will be deported, despite having lived in Australia continuously since 1966.
In 2003, he was convicted of five counts of indecent dealing and indecent assault between 1980 and 2001. He has been in immigration detention since 2022.
The same majority as in Benbrika said “quirks of timing in the commencement and conclusion of criminal proceedings did not allow a person’s prior criminal conduct to remain unconsidered”.
The court also ruled on Wednesday that the Catholic Church should not have been granted a permanent stay in a historical sex abuse case involving a priest in Lismore.
In the 3-2 decision, the majority (Kiefel, Gageler and Jagot) said a permanent stay was “a measure of last resort”.
“The grant of a permanent stay to prevent an abuse of process involves a decision that permitting a matter to go to trial and the rendering of a verdict would be irreconcilable with the administration of justice through the operation of the adversarial system.”
Chief Justice Susan Kiefel.
From what I can decipher in that one case the entire argument is the courts won't enforce a ministers personal order to revoke someone's citizenship. The court is saying that's their job, not his, and he's made himself the judge, jury and executioner. I don't think Americans would have a bar of politicians deciding those kinds of criminal outcomes, it's a really fine line with this kind of shit. Write the laws properly (mandatory) and let the judges rule on it.
 

wiggins

Forum Veteran
From what I can decipher in that one case the entire argument is the courts won't enforce a ministers personal order to revoke someone's citizenship. The court is saying that's their job, not his, and he's made himself the judge, jury and executioner. I don't think Americans would have a bar of politicians deciding those kinds of criminal outcomes, it's a really fine line with this kind of shit. Write the laws properly (mandatory) and let the judges rule on it.
Yes. I agree with your premise whole heartedly. The n*gger in the wood pile is the activist court which is why I mentioned crown vs Love.

I seem to recall Menzies cancelling Wilfred Burchett's passport so he could not re enter Aus back in the 50's... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_Burchett

My concern is that this jihadist will be allowed out and then get back to business.
 

D.O.A.

Elon did nothing wrong
Yes. I agree with your premise whole heartedly. The n*gger in the wood pile is the activist court which is why I mentioned crown vs Love.

I seem to recall Menzies cancelling Wilfred Burchett's passport so he could not re enter Aus back in the 50's... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_Burchett

My concern is that this jihadist will be allowed out and then get back to business.
There's a lot of kiwis here get deported all the time for fucking up on their work visa so whatever law they were trying to pull on this jihad fuck was too much kneejerk and not enough passing laws to make it mandatory so these stupid judges don't have to think too much about it, just do as they're instructed. As much as Labor are as useless as tits on a bull I think they'll have a run at it and try again, Albanese is sounding very hesitant to shit on Dutton for trying his way or shoot the case down which is surprising.
 

Tottie

You've got to laugh
It's wonderful living in Aus with our progressive High Court (Supreme Court for our US cousins).

Apart from making an interesting ruling last year that was based on some kind of magical thinking when they ruled that Mr Love, a white looking criminal born in NZ, and without Australian nationality, could not be deported back home after his criminal offences , like all the other non Aussies get, because he claimed some % aboriginality and thus 'was unable to be alienated from his land', they have now ruled that due to separation of powers the government cannot cancel the passport of a convicted terrorist who was planning on mayhem at the MCG (our Melbourne Cricket Ground sports Mecca ... pun here I think...).

So Johny Jihad, who has never recanted his radicalism, can have another go...

Terrorist wins citizenship battle in High Court​

Michael Pelly

Michael PellyLegal editor
Nov 1, 2023 – 1.36pm

Convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to restore his Australian citizenship, three years after it was cancelled by the Morrison government.
The court said the section of the Migration Act used by then home affairs minister Peter Dutton was constitutionally invalid because it usurped “the exclusively judicial function of punishing criminal guilt”.
9955c5daae3bddae107c4ec11afbb00c8e7f27f8

Terrorism plot: Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to retain his Australian citizenship. ABC
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the government would “examine the ruling and respond appropriately”.
“Quite clearly, there was an issue with the former government’s legislation, which is what this ruling relates to, but when it comes to the legal consequences we will seek advice,” Mr Albanese said.
In another migration case, the court upheld the cancellation of citizenship for British-born Phyllip Jones, after he did not reveal offences against minors on his 1988 application.



Algerian-born Mr Benbrika, 63, was found guilty in 2008 of leading a terror cell that plotted attacks on Melbourne landmarks in 2005, including the AFL grand final at the MCG. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail.
When Mr Benbrika’s sentence expired in November 2020, Mr Dutton cancelled his citizenship and he was placed in immigration detention under continuing detention order. The order is due to expire on December 23.
It was the first time a person had been stripped of their citizenship for a terrorism offence while in Australia. Mr Benbrika had been in Australia since 1989 and a citizen since 1998.
Mr Dutton also stripped citizenship from Delil Alexander, a Turkish-Australian man accused of fighting for ISIS. Mr Alexander lost a High Court challenge last year.
The court rejected the Commonwealth argument that a minister should be “allowed to deprive a person of citizenship involuntarily as punishment following a conviction”.
The lead judgment of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel and Justices Stephen Gageler, Jacqueline Gleeson and Jayne Jagot said: “The Commonwealth parliament cannot repose in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any function of sentencing persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Nor can the Commonwealth parliament vest in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any power to impose additional or further punishment on persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Section 36D(1) [of the Migration Act] purports to vest such a power to impose additional or further punishment in the minister.”
In his dissent, Justice Simon Steward said it had “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”.
In the other migration case, Mr Jones, 73, lost his appeal and will be deported, despite having lived in Australia continuously since 1966.
In 2003, he was convicted of five counts of indecent dealing and indecent assault between 1980 and 2001. He has been in immigration detention since 2022.
The same majority as in Benbrika said “quirks of timing in the commencement and conclusion of criminal proceedings did not allow a person’s prior criminal conduct to remain unconsidered”.
The court also ruled on Wednesday that the Catholic Church should not have been granted a permanent stay in a historical sex abuse case involving a priest in Lismore.
In the 3-2 decision, the majority (Kiefel, Gageler and Jagot) said a permanent stay was “a measure of last resort”.
“The grant of a permanent stay to prevent an abuse of process involves a decision that permitting a matter to go to trial and the rendering of a verdict would be irreconcilable with the administration of justice through the operation of the adversarial system.”
Chief Justice Susan Kiefel.
No offence bro,you're a goodn, but that was too much to read.u was always kinda
It's wonderful living in Aus with our progressive High Court (Supreme Court for our US cousins).

Apart from making an interesting ruling last year that was based on some kind of magical thinking when they ruled that Mr Love, a white looking criminal born in NZ, and without Australian nationality, could not be deported back home after his criminal offences , like all the other non Aussies get, because he claimed some % aboriginality and thus 'was unable to be alienated from his land', they have now ruled that due to separation of powers the government cannot cancel the passport of a convicted terrorist who was planning on mayhem at the MCG (our Melbourne Cricket Ground sports Mecca ... pun here I think...).

So Johny Jihad, who has never recanted his radicalism, can have another go...

Terrorist wins citizenship battle in High Court​

Michael Pelly

Michael PellyLegal editor
Nov 1, 2023 – 1.36pm

Convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to restore his Australian citizenship, three years after it was cancelled by the Morrison government.
The court said the section of the Migration Act used by then home affairs minister Peter Dutton was constitutionally invalid because it usurped “the exclusively judicial function of punishing criminal guilt”.
9955c5daae3bddae107c4ec11afbb00c8e7f27f8

Terrorism plot: Abdul Nacer Benbrika has won a High Court bid to retain his Australian citizenship. ABC
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the government would “examine the ruling and respond appropriately”.
“Quite clearly, there was an issue with the former government’s legislation, which is what this ruling relates to, but when it comes to the legal consequences we will seek advice,” Mr Albanese said.
In another migration case, the court upheld the cancellation of citizenship for British-born Phyllip Jones, after he did not reveal offences against minors on his 1988 application.



Algerian-born Mr Benbrika, 63, was found guilty in 2008 of leading a terror cell that plotted attacks on Melbourne landmarks in 2005, including the AFL grand final at the MCG. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail.
When Mr Benbrika’s sentence expired in November 2020, Mr Dutton cancelled his citizenship and he was placed in immigration detention under continuing detention order. The order is due to expire on December 23.
It was the first time a person had been stripped of their citizenship for a terrorism offence while in Australia. Mr Benbrika had been in Australia since 1989 and a citizen since 1998.
Mr Dutton also stripped citizenship from Delil Alexander, a Turkish-Australian man accused of fighting for ISIS. Mr Alexander lost a High Court challenge last year.
The court rejected the Commonwealth argument that a minister should be “allowed to deprive a person of citizenship involuntarily as punishment following a conviction”.
The lead judgment of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel and Justices Stephen Gageler, Jacqueline Gleeson and Jayne Jagot said: “The Commonwealth parliament cannot repose in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any function of sentencing persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Nor can the Commonwealth parliament vest in any officer of the Commonwealth executive any power to impose additional or further punishment on persons convicted by Chapter III courts of offences against Commonwealth laws.
“Section 36D(1) [of the Migration Act] purports to vest such a power to impose additional or further punishment in the minister.”
In his dissent, Justice Simon Steward said it had “never been an essentially judicial function to make orders which denationalise a person”.
In the other migration case, Mr Jones, 73, lost his appeal and will be deported, despite having lived in Australia continuously since 1966.
In 2003, he was convicted of five counts of indecent dealing and indecent assault between 1980 and 2001. He has been in immigration detention since 2022.
The same majority as in Benbrika said “quirks of timing in the commencement and conclusion of criminal proceedings did not allow a person’s prior criminal conduct to remain unconsidered”.
The court also ruled on Wednesday that the Catholic Church should not have been granted a permanent stay in a historical sex abuse case involving a priest in Lismore.
In the 3-2 decision, the majority (Kiefel, Gageler and Jagot) said a permanent stay was “a measure of last resort”.
“The grant of a permanent stay to prevent an abuse of process involves a decision that permitting a matter to go to trial and the rendering of a verdict would be irreconcilable with the administration of justice through the operation of the adversarial system.”
Chief Justice Susan Kiefel.
I literally read clown down to the picture.why even bother, I'd need to pay mad money to get oz cool
 

wiggins

Forum Veteran
There's a lot of kiwis here get deported all the time for fucking up on their work visa so whatever law they were trying to pull on this jihad fuck was too much kneejerk and not enough passing laws to make it mandatory so these stupid judges don't have to think too much about it, just do as they're instructed. As much as Labor are as useless as tits on a bull I think they'll have a run at it and try again, Albanese is sounding very hesitant to shit on Dutton for trying his way or shoot the case down which is surprising.
Yes, I did notice that.

Albo will need to be on the ball with this jihadi stuff what with all the 'river to the sea' stuff going down at present.

The time seems ripe for a decent bit of jihad from our quality migrant intake.

Our AG is off today as his wife died yesterday poor fucker, so he's missing in action and Albo is off to get pissed on Grange with Xi so that leaves that lisping wunderkind Marles in charge I think.

I need some government support to get over the NO vote myself. The part about Albo still pushing for 'truth telling' and 'treaty' after we voted 60% for NO.

Not that Im bitter...

so you guys are Canada now
Oh yes.

But 60% of us did just tell the government to fuck off with their special needs abo voice to parliament.

Wild mistake to put that up as a referendum.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top