11
Immigration detention explainer: how is Labor responding to the landmark high court ruling?
(www.theguardian.com)
A place to discuss Australia Politics.
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone.
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
https://aussie.zone/communities
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!