The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The dual citizenship scandal/imbroglio/fiasco > Comments

The dual citizenship scandal/imbroglio/fiasco : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 24/11/2017

It is surely worrying that another country can apparently determine whether or not one of our citizens is eligible to stand for our national parliament.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
It's not specifically about 44(i): this whole section 44 must go because it limits the ability of citizens to freely select their representative.

Forget about the false "rights" of candidates and parliamentarians: what about the right of ordinary people to be represented?
Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 24 November 2017 7:35:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dual citizenship should be abolished immediately. No exceptions. There is enough disloyalty from people who are only Australian - constantly displayed by certain posters on OLO - without encouraging immigrants and people with sentimental attachments to places they have never been to have five bob each way on citizenship.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 24 November 2017 8:01:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It's a veritable can of worms Don! As is the black letter interpretation of it that demonstrably bastardises the intention of the original (foreign) writers who crafted this wordy document.

Which when written, in no way, shape or form, excluded any citizen who shared our, (now foreign) head of state. And as such confounds the no reasonable man assumption, that normally guides most judges?

I believe this nonsense has quite a way to go, as will be the varying interpretation of successive high court Justices, and can only be fixed by a referendum, so imperious black letter law cannot be used to deny someone born here!

I was thinking just the other day of, apparently New Zealand Born of apparently Danish parents, Joh Bjelke Petersen. And the very popular Joh for PM campaign. Where had he been successful, could have seen him in contravention of section 44, on two counts?

As would it also, if applied quite literally to any of Queen Elizabeth's sons or daughters even if they became new Australians, without renouncing their British citizenship! And Greek heritage!

Both of which would have been equally absurd and a ridiculous interpretation, if the, any reasonable man, test could have applied? And clearly missing, in my view, on this occasion?

Without question, this particular can of worms is going to be opened from time to time, as and when, as on this occasion, when politically expedient? And needs a referendum and clear country wide by bipartisan support to ensure its passage?
Get well soon Don.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 24 November 2017 8:30:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
People aren't free on our roads and get police pursuit for doing 120 through Woolworths in a borrowed AWD Kluger with bull-bars. Can't do time in Canberra and clink / C-link .

"And in the Commonwealth, a person cannot take office if convicted and under sentence for a crime 'punishable' by a sentence of more than a year, thus linking disqualification not only to the person's actual sentence but to the maximum sentence for the crime.

History has shown that Australians are prepared to elect to office people who have been convicted and spent time in jail. Indeed the person chosen to give the address in reply to the Governor-General's speech in the very first federal parliament was also the only federal MP who had been transported to Australia as a convict, a man who furthermore had been convicted of theft while in Australia, William Groom."

If she's convicted of a 1yr jail offence and tells nobody is the law wrong or the pollie? Britain made the constitution , so a foreign power tells us everything about Honourable Members...don't hear "honourable" much these days , is that because they were too pig lazy to fill in a form to check the obvious about mum and dad?
Posted by nicknamenick, Friday, 24 November 2017 8:54:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We must apply this to all levels of the bureaucracy, including councils, & have none of these bob each way folk working, [or not] in any area with access to private or secret information.

This may not actually improve the standard of bureaucrats, but it is a neat way of making a most necessary reduction to the numbers on the tax payer payroll.

It should also be mandatory that part of the citizenship requirements be that any applicant show proof they have renounced & eliminated any foreign citizenship they may have held.

We should also have a law that no Australian born person can become a citizen of any other country, without first renouncing their Oz citizenship. That should effectively eliminate the Barnaby situation.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 24 November 2017 9:17:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
China gets all its info by dialling up Aust Defence Force and reading the files. There were 2 dozen British citizens who spied on behalf of Soviet Union and R Snowden did it from US. The US protected itself by asking migrants are you a commie and when they said "yes sir" the game was up.
Posted by nicknamenick, Friday, 24 November 2017 10:59:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"... black letter interpretation of it that demonstrably bastardises the intention of the original (foreign) writers who crafted this wordy document."

What a load of rubbish! Anything other than what the High Court did is unelected activism.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 24 November 2017 12:06:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Irish expansionism with Russian funding and alcohol trade is an emerging security risk for Canberra.
" It is worth noting that Irish traditions and customs are popular with young people in Russia. Scarcely a major city in Russia today does not have an Irish pub, and celebrations of Ireland's St. Patrick's Day in March have become a tradition in Moscow.
Russia's National Library of Foreign Literature in Moscow holds regular "Irish readings," while Dublin is always happy to welcome performers from Russia, such as from the Bolshoi Theatre."

This is just the edge of Moscow's wedge.
Posted by nicknamenick, Friday, 24 November 2017 12:26:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry ttbn, but the "unelected" high court removed a number of elected representatives, including Australian born Barnaby, because of dual citizenship!

Because his migrating Dad was a Kiwi and fellow Anzac, for heaven's sake!

Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of cases would have been eligible when our Constitution was first crafted!

Given, they at that time, were British citizens and even today, still call our head of state their head of state! What part of that, don't you understand?

Moreover, just labelling something you disagree with or from a particular person's pen, rubbish. Does you a disservice rather than swaying other opinion!

Clearly you have no understanding whatsoever of section 44 and your commentary, labels you a sore loser?

Now prove me right, with another gob full of similarly, mindless abuse.

You'll have a nice day now y'hear.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 24 November 2017 6:50:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anyone prepared to stand in front of a bullet for an adopted country, can very obviously be trusted with state secrets! Which is more than one can say for some, [glaring examples,] native born folk!

i.e., Assange, Snowden?

With kiss and tell examples like that, and an ASIO both bugged and crawling with Russian operatives? Some of them born here of Austrian citizenry!

Makes a nonsense out of moribund Hasbeen's politically jaundiced, patently prejudiced, commentary! Wind him up and turn him lose! ELIMINATE, ELIMINATE, ELIMINATE! Who, Who?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 24 November 2017 7:07:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" native born folk!"
This is a major problem with Thorium and Nevil Shute's 'On The Beach' with Sturt's Desert reaching from Perth to Barrier Reef . The country needs a quota of poms, Scots and fersh cherps min to keep an eye on the hot rocks.
Posted by nicknamenick, Friday, 24 November 2017 7:20:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It seems to me that it is time we had another referendum to change Section 44(1) to remove " or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject of a foreign power".

In my case, I have two grandfathers who were both born in Ireland and if I am able to produce the appropriate documentation, then I would be able to claim citizenship of the Republic of Ireland, even though both my parents were born and raised in Australia, each with a father who was an born in Ireland.

There are many of my generation to whom the above problen arises. There are also some countries which do not allow their citizens to revoke their citizenship. I know that it used to apply in Greece, I am not sure whether it still applies.

As it presently stands, the whole thing is a mess and it can only be resolved by a change to the constitution. We should not have to rely on the High Court to resolve all the individual cases as and when they crop up.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Friday, 24 November 2017 9:55:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Allan,

You should be sorry,too: for your ignorance of the fact that the dual citizens were WRONGLY, UNCONSTITUTIONALLY elected and were too stupid, or deceitful and lying, to realise that fact. The is no law higher than the Constitution. Further, what would have been legal when the Constitution was written, is not legal now, and your comment is downright silly. In this instance, the HC judges acted properly, and unanimously. Your ignorance of the Constitution is as appalling as that of the ineligible nicampoops you are defending. And, I am not trying to 'sway' your opinion because you are incapable of accepting the truth. It is you who have no understanding of the Constitution, and I am not a loser because I agree with the Court's decision. Your cranky ideas are wrong, not mine. I could recommend a book, written by a constitutional law professor, but I doubt that you would understand it even if you were not too pig-headed enough to read it.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 24 November 2017 9:56:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David,

A rewrite of sec. 44 is not going to happen. Even the politicians are not going for that. Why people would even want people in parliament who are so ignorant of, or contemptuous of, the Constitution that they are supposed to be upholding is he beyond me. At the very least, the people involved were too dumb to be in parliament. That, or they are too dishonest. There is no getting around it.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 24 November 2017 10:11:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn, Thanks for your commentary and the gob full of abuse that demonstrably, makes my case for me!

You are just so deleted expletive predictable! Just need winging up and letting go! Anything to add, genius?

Whether we do or don't have an overdue referendum is not down to you or equally certain Hasbeen! But the majority! Repeat,MAJORITY!

Wouldn't it be wonderfully revealing, if either of those two "gentlemen" had a Greek, or some other similarly disposed nationality, great great great great granpappy somewhere in their lineage!? And as such, also became ineligible as irrevocable dual citizens?

And without question, not in any way, shape or form, the intention of the crafters of our (non-amended) constitution, which by the way would now render the writers, if still living, both of them, ineligible! And indeed all their sons and daughters!

As I understand it, only a successful referendum can alter/amend the constitution, not the high court which remains limited to interpretation only!

And therefore cannot reinterpret under a constitution, they apparently and independently of the people, amended in 88?

And by dint of a reinterpretation in the British parliament of the term British? And therefore folks born in any part of the non Australian commonwealth, even though they had the very same head of state, went from being eligible in 87 to ineligible in 88!

I rest my case.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Saturday, 25 November 2017 9:42:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
VK3AUU,

"In my case, I have two grandfathers who were both born in Ireland and if I am able to produce the appropriate documentation, then I would be able to claim citizenship of the Republic of Ireland, even though both my parents were born and raised in Australia, each with a father who was born in Ireland"

In that case, you are an Irish citizen all that you can claim from the Irish Government is recognition of that fact and your inclusion in the Book of Foreign Births, then a Passport and all the advantages that come with it.

Just don't stand for Parliament*!!

*in Australia.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 25 November 2017 9:50:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Let us pray that Charles sent his letter to Greece. "An ethnic Greek born outside of Greece may acquire Greek citizenship by naturalization if they fail to qualify for simple registration as the child of a Greek citizen. The applicant must prove that at least one parent or grandparent was born a Greek national."

Philip as a duke is nothing compared to King Charles the Greek , Emperor of Australia and Melbourne Greeks.
Posted by nicknamenick, Saturday, 25 November 2017 10:00:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan B. don't bother with that total troll being nasty. It has no understanding of history or the intent of the Constitution and tries to camouflage it with bluster.
Posted by minotaur, Saturday, 25 November 2017 10:17:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Allan,

I have not abused you. You might want me to abuse you, but I haven't and I will not. You just don't like people disagreeing with you.

Tell me. Just how does the “majority” get a referendum up? Has it ever been done before? You seem to be confusing Australia with Switzerland, where they have Citizen Initiated Referenda, and a certain number of people can petition the government for a referendum. It simply is not like that here. Australian politicians will not permit that to happen because it's far too dangerous for them.

Even the politicians do not want the expense of a referendum when there is no call nor need for one. All that is necessary is for political candidates in future to check the Constitution and ensure that they can legally stand for parliament. And, of course, nobody trusts politicians enough to help them meddle with the Constitution – except, perhaps, you. That's why most referendums fail. And, anyone wanting to go into politics in the future will have by now got the message. So,there is no problem to be fixed.

I am glad that you have finally grasped the fact that that the Constitution can only be changed by a referendum achieving a positive vote by a majority of voters in a majority of states. 99.9% of Australians already knew that.

You can download the Australian Constitution free if you want to improve your knowledge, and there a loads of books about the Constitution written in a way that the layperson can understand.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 25 November 2017 11:21:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
minotaur
It was the Aust Govt which abused the intent of the Constitution when changing the definition of citizenship. It could easily have written that for the purpose of s44 those people are able to be elected. That would fit the intent of the Fed Constitution as well as the interests of th Crown.
Posted by nicknamenick, Saturday, 25 November 2017 11:59:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
nnn...which change to the citizenship act are you referring to? There have been a few...or did you now know that? And how do you know what the intent of the Constitution is?
Posted by minotaur, Sunday, 26 November 2017 12:21:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
minotaur
You replied to Alan who said "And therefore folks born in any part of the non Australian commonwealth, even though they had the very same head of state, went from being eligible in 87 to ineligible in 88!"
You also wrote of " the intent of the Constitution."

MP's can
1) write a sensible citizenship act
2) comply with the Constit. and write a letter to
Pom House
Home Office
c/- HM Elizabeth and Charlie.
Posted by nicknamenick, Sunday, 26 November 2017 12:48:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Without question, a decent MAJORITY would carry the day in any referendum. 61-62 % would likely take every state, with something like 17 seats voting for the no case! The entire length and breadth of the country!

I'd bet my house if a properly worded question, like is it right and proper for an Australian born of a lest one Australian parent, who can trace at least one ancestor to the first or second fleet!

Be made ineligible for public office in any Australian parliament by the decisions of any, repeat any foreign parliament. Including a British parliament!?

Or for that matter, any new Australian who has served in our, or shoulder to shoulder, allied armed forces, and has taken a sacred oath of Allegiance to us and ours; and no other!?

Britain, since entering the EU, has since 88, treated all Australians/Anzacs as aliens with less rights than former common enemies!

Anything other than a resounding yes, offends the fair go principle, now part and deep in the heart, of the Aussie/Anzac ethos!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 27 November 2017 12:15:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan
We only have convict MPs because of Poms . And only spaeka da Englis here due to German George III ( his grandpa couldn't). There are no MPs at all as we have seen this year in Canberra.

" Section 44(i) of the Australian Constitution says that a person is incapable of being elected , if they are "entitled to the rights or privileges of a citizen of a foreign power".-- you just have to be entitled to those rights and privileges.
,. under recent and little-noticed changes to New Zealand law, Any Australian citizen is entitled to live, study and work there.
, .subject to New Zealand law, working or studying. And there's no doubt that New Zealand is a "foreign power" -- you only have to watch the All Blacks do the haka to realise that.

New Zealand law has made every Australian citizen incapable of being elected to, or serving in, the Australian Parliament. It's not just Barnaby Joyce: It's everyone!"_ R Angyal , barrister .

As there is no parliament then the Gov Gen and the Greens must quickly get the acts together.
Posted by nicknamenick, Monday, 27 November 2017 1:19:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy