07.07.2014 Views

3432 ACC Report f/a 1 - Australian Citizenship

3432 ACC Report f/a 1 - Australian Citizenship

3432 ACC Report f/a 1 - Australian Citizenship

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

The Council endorses the thrust of the<br />

Committee’s views outlined above. The Council<br />

believes this provision discriminates against<br />

<strong>Australian</strong> Citizens who hold, for various<br />

reasons including accident of birth, another<br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong> in addition to <strong>Australian</strong><br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong>. The fundamental tenet underlying<br />

<strong>Australian</strong> <strong>Citizenship</strong> is that of inclusivity and<br />

full participation in all aspects of <strong>Australian</strong><br />

life. The Council believes that all <strong>Australian</strong><br />

Citizens should be able to stand for Parliament<br />

irrespective of whether they hold another<br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong>. Those who hold another<br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong> are not required by <strong>Australian</strong><br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong> law to renounce their other<br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong>/s when acquiring <strong>Australian</strong><br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong> and, as a general principle,<br />

the Government encourages migrants/new<br />

Citizens to maintain their cultural heritage<br />

whilst living in Australia. Sub-section 44(i)<br />

of the Constitution is therefore at odds with<br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong> law and government policies of<br />

successive governments.<br />

The Council is in accord with the views of both<br />

the Committee and the Government that there<br />

is a need to protect the parliamentary system.<br />

However, it could be argued that the holding of<br />

another <strong>Citizenship</strong> does not of itself mean that<br />

a person would necessarily act in a disloyal<br />

manner. Any <strong>Australian</strong> Citizen whether or not<br />

they hold another <strong>Citizenship</strong> potentially could<br />

have split loyalties or conflict of interests for<br />

various reasons. One circumstance could be<br />

where an <strong>Australian</strong> Citizen who does not<br />

possess another <strong>Citizenship</strong> has commercial<br />

interests in another country. Sub-section 44(i)<br />

as it currently stands assumes that if a person<br />

holds another <strong>Citizenship</strong> there will<br />

automatically be issues of conflict of interests<br />

and divided loyalties. The holding of another<br />

<strong>Citizenship</strong> is perhaps the most obvious way<br />

of alerting others to potential divided loyalty.<br />

However, it would appear that the issue is not<br />

whether a person holds another <strong>Citizenship</strong>,<br />

but rather whether a person might not act in<br />

Australia’s best interests at all times. Therefore,<br />

another measure or identifier relating to<br />

loyalty may need to be found.<br />

The Council supports Recommendation 2<br />

in the report of the Standing Committee on<br />

Legal and Constitutional Affairs, on Aspects of<br />

Section 44 of the <strong>Australian</strong> Constitution,<br />

in particular that there be a requirement for<br />

intending candidates and members of<br />

Parliament to be <strong>Australian</strong> Citizens, but<br />

recommends that further consideration be<br />

given by government to the issue of how to<br />

more appropriately measure ‘undivided loyalty<br />

to Australia’ for intending candidates for<br />

Parliament and members of Parliament.<br />

77

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!