Another referendum could be on the cards if Peter Dutton becomes prime minister, as the federal opposition considers changing the Constitution to allow for the deportation of dual-national criminals.
The opposition leader confirmed he was weighing up the proposal during an interview on Sunrise on March 18.
This marks his second attempt at introducing such deportation laws, following a previous effort struck down by the High Court.
The court ruled that granting politicians the power to impose criminal punishment, rather than leaving it to the judiciary, was unconstitutional.
“You can’t out-legislate the Constitution,” Dutton said.
High Court Stumbling Blocks
A referendum would be needed to override a 2022 High Court ruling that found it unconstitutional for ministers to have the power to strip citizenship from Australians because it amounted to “punishment in the sense of retribution.”
The ruling followed a case in which a man, who had joined the terror group Islamic State, successfully argued that revoking his citizenship was unlawful.
A similar case in 2023 allowed convicted terrorist Abdul Nacer Benbrika to remain in Australia after the High Court struck down legislation passed under the Coalition government.
Currently, Australian law permits deportation of dual nationals only under a judge’s ruling if they have been sentenced to more than three years and have committed crimes such as terrorism or treason.
The law also requires that the deportation be for reasons beyond punishment, such as safeguarding the community.
Coalition Defends the Cost
In making the pledge, Dutton has also been forced to justify why Australians should be paying for another referendum, when it consistently criticised the Labor government for spending $450 million on the failed Voice referendum.“With The Voice, it was the wrong issue for the government to put to the people,” Dutton said.
“If we believe that we want to keep people safe, if you want to keep your kids safe and we want to keep kids safe in our community, I don’t think you can put a price on that.”
Divisive Political Reactions
Labor Treasurer Jim Chalmers dismissed Dutton’s move as a distraction.“Last time he tried to impose these laws, the High Court threw them out. Now he wants a referendum to fix his mistakes,” Chalmers told ABC radio.
“He’s quite bizarre. He wants another referendum. I don’t think this idea will last long, just like a lot of the other things he has said in an effort to avoid talking about the economy and his [public service] cuts.”
Tasmanian Senator Jacqui Lambie also criticised the proposal, calling it an expensive and divisive move.
“I just want to know when did Peter Dutton bring those former retired judges to the table and discuss the best way around this?” she asked on Sky News.
“Because I just don’t know why we need to go to a referendum, which is, by the way, going to cost millions. It'll become toxic.”
She also questioned the timing, suggesting Dutton was using the issue to gain political traction ahead of the election.
Coalition MPs Publicly Back Idea
However, some within the Coalition have backed the idea.Nationals frontbencher Bridget McKenzie said voters were “mature enough” to debate the issue.
“It’s one of the great institutions of our Constitution that we hold a referendum if you want to change our founding document, that we ask every single Australian their opinion on the change,” she told ABC Radio National Breakfast.
Nationals Senator Matt Canavan also expressed support, though he called for careful consideration.
“It’s something I’m happy to consider. I fully support the policy,” he told Sky News.
“Obviously, any change to our Constitution deserves very, very careful consideration, and I’m very, very happy to consider something like this because I do support the overall policy intent. But as with any referendum change, the devil is in the detail.”
