The Australian Citizenship Act has been changed to give talented potential Australians a path to citizenship. The residence requirement, which requires a prospective Australian to have spent a particular period of time in Australia before applying for citizenship, is now more flexible.

This extra residency requirement has been extended to holders of distinguished talent and global talent visas who have done the following in the two years prior to applying for Australian citizenship:

• resident in Australia on a regular basis
• a permanent resident of Australia who has spent at least 180 days in the country
• with at least 90 of those days occurring in the 12 months preceding the application.

Citizenship through descent in Australia and proof of citizenship in Australia

Changes to the lodgement arrangements for applications for Australian citizenship by descent and evidence of Australian citizenship have also been introduced, requiring all applications to be made through ImmiAccount starting November 1, 2021. These modifications will allow for faster application processing and easier application management.

Because they were not deemed ‘immediate family,’ parents of Australian citizens and permanent residents were unable to travel to Australia during the epidemic and were not eligible for a travel exemption. The good news is that when seeking a travel exemption to visit their children in Australia, parents would now be considered immediate relatives.

This is especially good news for parent visa applicants who left Australia on a bridging visa and have been unable to return, as well as those who have recently welcomed new grandkids. Parents who are caught abroad on a Bridging Visa B must apply for a guest visa in order to return to Australia, and their bridging visa will be renewed once they arrive.

The Migration and Citizenship Legislation Amendment (Strengthening Information Provisions) Bill 2020 should not be voted into law, the Law Council of Australia advised the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security this morning.

The Bill would add a new Protected Information Framework to the Migration Act 1958 and the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, under which ‘confidential information’ provided by gazetted agencies, such as foreign law enforcement bodies and multiple Australian agencies, could be used to cancel a visa or revoke citizenship without the person having a chance to challenge the information or even knowing it was being used against them.

“While the Law Council accepts that there is a public interest in law enforcement and criminal intelligence agencies providing probative information to officials responsible for exercising character-related powers, the proposal to establish a Protected Information Framework must balance those interests against principles fundamental to a democratic legal system,” said Dr. Jacoba Brasch QC, President of the Law Council.

“The right to a fair hearing, effective judicial review, proper administration of justice, and legislative and independent scrutiny of executive power are among these principles.”

“If passed, the revisions would apply to information provided by agencies designated by the Minister, without any Parliamentary scrutiny, and of a type that does not need to pass any statutory test as to its nature, sensitivity, truthfulness, or disclosure risks.

“Under this Framework, a person will likely have no way of addressing the accuracy of the material or any inferences drawn from it — hampered their capacity to respond.” The Court may only consider security and law enforcement interests in considering whether to order disclosure in any judicial review procedure, not the parties’ interests or interests in the administration of justice.

“These actions have a substantial impact on the court’s and its processes’ integrity. The Law Council believes the bill fails to strike the necessary balance between law enforcement needs and the right to a fair hearing. The exercise of these rights has serious repercussions, including the loss of the right to remain in Australia and citizenship.”

“The Law Council believes that the case for the proposed Protected Information Framework has not been made and that, in order to guarantee consistency across Commonwealth laws, a whole-of-government approach to handling sensitive information, including in judicial review processes, is essential.”