Australia plans to make another try at laws to strip citizenship from people suspected of involvement with terrorism.
Australia's previous laws that allowed ministers to cancel citizenship
based on suspicion were ruled unconstitutional.
The proposed replacement will be somewhat less unjust, simply because
there will be some sort of court hearing to decide. But will that
hearing be supposed to respect the same rights that a trial is
supposed to respect? I fear it will follow a lesser standard, and
that would make it an injustice.
Exile is a severe punishment, and it should not be imposed without
the same safeguards that imprisonment would require.
I suggest that if a country wants to take away someone's citizenship
over alleged terrorism, it should first arrest per, then put per on
trial for that terrorism. If the accused chooses to remain in exile
to avoid the trial, this achieves the same goal indirectly. However,
person must have the right to return and face trial so as to clear per
name.
Laws to empower a government to impose temporary exile on a citizen
are likewise unjust. Any form of arbitrary state power can be useful
for "managing risks", but that is not enough to excuse it.