Fiji says that Neil Prakash does not have Fijian citizenship and cannot apply for it. Thus, Australia seems to have rendered him stateless.

Once Australia adopted the policy of making bets like this, it was certain that it would lose a bet sooner or later.

What if he did have Fijian citizenship even though he has never been there? I question the legitimacy of telling a person, "You are now required to live in that country over there, which you don't know, where you don't know anyone, and you don't speak the local language."

I criticized the US for doing that — for instance, deporting to Mexico a man who was indeed a Mexican citizen but had been brought to the US as a small child.

Countries sometimes need to punish their own citizens, after a fair trial, but should never exile them. Not even after a trial — which Prakash did not have. Australia exiled him without a trial.