Immigration detention explainer: how is Labor responding to the landmark high court ruling?
Immigration detention explainer: how is Labor responding to the landmark high court ruling?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In the bill’s original form, curfews and electronic monitoring were discretionary, which Giles said would ensure they were applied “on a case-by-case basis, only where necessary to support the safety of the community”.
Giles said enforcement will depend on what is a “proportionate response in the circumstances”, suggesting only those who “deliberately evade contact” with the Department of Home Affairs will be targeted.
However, the home affairs minister, Clare O’Neil, said it is “untrue” that the government can do so, because the high court had ruled it did not have the power to do so.
The high court ruled detention is unlawful where there is “no real prospect” of removal from Australia “becoming practicable in the reasonably foreseeable future”.
Giles said the range of conditions will ensure authorities “remain aware of the noncitizen’s location, activities and associations” so that “they are available as soon as removal is practicable”.
In question time, Marles revealed Labor had agreed to a suite of Coalition amendments including stipulating that people can’t go within 150 metres of a school or childcare centre, creating a power to prohibit people convicted of violent or sexual crimes contacting victims or their families and a prohibition on working with or activities with children.
The original article contains 689 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
AFAIk only a small minority are killers and pedos (one of each). So why do they all have to wear ankle bracelets?
It is highly likely that many, if not most, are of character concern. These are some of the most complex cases that the government has been unable to find a resolution to. In other complex cases where a person cannot be deported due to non-refoulement obligations people are often permitted to live in the Aus community on BVEs in perpetuity. That these people have been held in detention so long is an indicator that something is not right.
It'll be interesting to see how the government responds to this; there's no easy answer. What are you supposed to do when a murderer seeks protection, and has been refused protection, and still you're not allowed to deport them?
Thanks