Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Ex parte Ame [2005] HCA 36

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,

McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJ

RE MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND

MULTICULTURAL AND INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS RESPONDENT

EX PARTE AMOS BODE AME APPLICANT/PROSECUTOR

Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs; Ex parte Ame

[2005] HCA 36

4 August 2005

M146/2004

ORDER

Questions in the Case Stated answered as follows:

1. Q. On the proper construction of regulation 4 of the Papua New Guinea Independence (Australian Citizenship) Regulations 1975 and the Papua New Guinea Constitution, did the Applicant cease to be an Australian citizen under the Australian Citizenship Act 1948 on Independence day?

1. Yes.

2. Q. If the answer to question (1) is "Yes", is regulation 4 of the Papua New Guinea Independence (Australian Citizenship) Regulations 1975 authorised by s 6 of the Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975?

1. Yes.

3. Q. If the answer to questions (1) and (2) is "Yes", is s 6 of the Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975, to the extent that it authorises regulation 4 of the Papua New Guinea Independence (Australian Citizenship) Regulations 1975, invalid in that it is not supported by s 51(xix), (xxvii), (xxix) or (xxx) of the Constitution, ss 51(xxxix) and 61 of the Constitution, the "implied nationhood" power, s 122 of the Constitution, or any other head of Commonwealth power?

1. No.

4. Q. Once the [applicant's] bridging visa … has expired, are ss 189, 196 and 198 of the Migration Act 1958 capable of valid application to the applicant on the basis that:

1) he is an alien, within the meaning of section 51(xix) of the Constitution; or

2) in their application to him those provisions are laws with respect to immigration within section 51(xxvii) of the Constitution; or

3) on any other basis?

A. (1) Yes.

5. Q. Who should pay the costs of the Stated Case and the hearing of the Stated Case before the Full Court of this Court?