Two major citizenship cases involving dual citizens convicted of criminal offences were handed down by the High Court last week, but with strikingly different outcomes., who arrived in Australia in 1989 in his late 20s, becoming a citizen in 1998. Ten years later he was convicted of terrorism offences by the Supreme Court of Victoria.
The court determined the minister was improperly exercising judicial power by stripping Benbrika of his citizenship, because in this context the cessation of citizenship was a form of punishment. Last week, Benbrika’s Australian citizenship was restored. These two decisions and Gordon’s dissent bring sharp focus to the more basic question about the purpose of citizenship laws in a liberal democracy. Its purpose now affords a disequilibrium of citizenship – valuing sole citizenship above dual citizenship, and some classes of dual citizen as more vulnerable. Hence the different High Court outcomes.But citizenship is more constructively viewed as a frame for nation-building and social cohesion.