.png)
8 months ago
46
The Albanese government's proposed 'Trump-style' travel ban' has sparked international uproar, with the Russian embassy criticising the move and Iraqi officials caught off-guard by the potential changes.
The Federal government this week attempted to rush legislation through Parliament banning visitors from some foreign countries from coming to Australia, including tourists.
The countries expected to be blacklisted including Iran, Iraq, Russia, South Sudan and Zimbabwe. These countries do not accept citizens who have been deported from Australia, and the government hopes a travel ban could force them to back down.
But Daily Mail Australia can reveal the proposal, which has stalled in Parliament, is causing a diplomatic headache for the government.
A spokesperson for the Russian Embassy in Canberra told Daily Mail Australia the inclusion of Russia in this proposed legislation 'is quite far-fetched'.
Tourists from at least five countries could be banned from travelling to Australia if Labor's tough new proposed migration laws pass Parliament. It's possible more would follow
A spokesperson for the Russian Embassy in Canberra told Daily Mail Australia the inclusion of Russia in this proposed legislation 'is quite far-fetched'
'We are struggling to remember a single occasion where the Australian Government expressed concerns about the removal of a Russian national not having a valid reason to remain or asked us for cooperation with such removal,' the spokesperson fumed.
The Russian embassy was not approached or briefed by the Australian government about the legislation or its potential effects, the spokesman added.
When contacted by Daily Mail Australia, the Iraqi embassy in Canberra appeared caught off-guard, asking for information about the proposal.
The travel ban proposal comes as the government braces for a High Court case on April 17, known as ASF17, which could further reignite controversy over its handling of immigration.
The government spent weeks under fire after the High Court's decision in the NZYQ case last November saw 149 detainees - including criminals - released onto the streets.
The applicant in this new case is an Iranian man who is refusing to cooperate with his deportation because he fears he will be persecuted, and face the death penalty, if he returns to Iran as a bisexual man.
As it stands, there are up to 200 people in immigration detention who are in similar circumstances, and the government fears the High Court could order their release before Parliament signs off on changing the rules.
Potentially impacted diasporas have been voicing their disapproval for the legislation in the days since it was announced.
Human rights lawyers have described it as 'the pure definition of discrimination,' and 'Trumpian', while others have questioned whether Labor would have ever supported the Coalition if roles were reversed.
The travel ban proposal comes as the government braces for a High Court case on April 17, known as ASF17, which could further reignite controversy over its handling of immigration
Both Ms O'Neil and Immigration Minister Andrew Giles held a press conference to air their disappointment on Wednesday
In a further bitter blow to the government, the Greens and the Coalition on Wednesday voted to delay the legislation.
They sent it to a Senate inquiry to scrutinise, which could take months to report back - while the clock ticks on Labor.
Greens Senator David Shoebridge slammed the proposal as 'Trump style immigration laws buried in Labor's deportation bill.
'They are designed to blacklist entire countries' citizens from obtaining visas to Australia.
'Thankfully we pushed this back from the brink with a Senate inquiry but the threat's still real.'
The matter is expected to return to the chamber in the same week the Budget will be handed down.
Following the disappointing outcome in the Senate for Labor, Home Affairs Minister Clare O'Neil and Immigration Minister Andrew Giles held a brief press conference where they expressed frustration with the situation.
Ms O'Neil said: 'We're very disappointed the Liberals have stymied our efforts. The reason that we need it is we seek to run an orderly migration system in this country.
'Because of 10 years of wilful neglect, we have an immigration system that... is fundamentally broken.'
Ms O'Neil accused the Coalition of 'playing politics' with the matter.
Opposition Immigration spokesman Dan Tehan said on Wednesday morning there was not enough clarity or information to approve the bill straight away.
'Once again, we are seeing a completely botched process by the government.
'What we want to do is properly scrutinise this piece of legislation – it is a serious piece of legislation – it deserves scrutiny, and everyone in the Senate agreed that it needed scrutiny except for the government.'
Your questions about the 'Trump style-travel ban', explained
How would the new 'tourist ban' work?
The proposed 'tourist ban' will only apply to nations which do not accept involuntary deportations.
The government hopes that the threat alone of banning entry to Australia will be enough to encourage co-operation from these nations.
Officials hope the law will give them leverage over the countries, so Australia can deport citizens who have no genuine claim to enter Australia.
One such example is the case which will appear in the High Court next month.
An Iranian man is refusing to cooperate with efforts to deport him because he is bisexual, and could face the death penalty if he returns home.
Iran does not accept citizens returning without their consent.
What was Donald Trump's travel ban, that the laws are being compared with?
Back in 2017, then-US President Donald Trump introduced a travel ban which prohibited entry to the United States to most citizens of Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya and Somalia. He later added North Korea and Venezuela to the list.
President Joe Biden revoked the ban when he took office.
If re-elected, Mr Trump has vowed to reinstate it, and extend it to include people from Gaza.
Why will the Albanese government's new laws take time to pass parliament?
Labor was relying on support for the Coalition to ensure this bill passed parliament this week.
The Greens are opposed to tougher detention policies and instantly expressed disdain for the bill. The crossbench in the House has also voted against it. Human rights groups have also denounced the proposal as inhumane.
While the Coalition isn't necessarily opposed to the contents of the bill, they have argued they didn't get enough time to examine the proposal, given they were only briefed on Tuesday morning during an already shortened parliamentary sitting week.
Opposition Home Affairs spokesman James Paterson said his party operated in 'good faith' on Tuesday by passing the bill through the House in order to examine it further during a hastily arranged Senate hearing, but claimed on Wednesday their questions were not appropriately answered.
So now the party has teamed up with the Greens to force the bill to be put before a Senate inquiry, which means there's no possible way it can pass Parliament on Wednesday, as Labor had hoped.
The Coalition has left the door open to return to Parliament during the break to debate the matter, but only if Labor proves there's a genuine, urgent need for the laws.
Labor has tried to argue the legislation is simply about closing a newly identified loophole, and have not tried to link this bill to the High Court case taking place on April 17.
In order to get the bill passed before that case, the Coalition may be hoping they'll concede that the two matters are related.
English (US)