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

The High Court of Australia considered the case of an applicant born in Papua prior to its independence in 1975, who had acquired Australian citizenship by birth but subsequently found himself in Australia without a substantive visa. The dispute centred on whether certain provisions of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) could validly apply to him, and whether he had ceased to be an Australian citizen upon Papua New Guinea's independence. The applicant also challenged the validity of regulations made under the *Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975* (Cth) that purportedly altered his citizenship status.

The Court was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether the applicant ceased to be an Australian citizen under the *Australian Citizenship Act 1948* (Cth) by virtue of the *Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975* (Cth) and associated regulations, and whether he became a citizen of Papua New Guinea under its Constitution. Furthermore, the Court had to consider whether the *Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975* (Cth) validly authorised the making of regulations affecting citizenship, and whether the legislative powers conferred by sections 122, 51(xix), and 51(xxvii) of the Australian Constitution could be exercised to change a person's status from non-alien to alien without their consent. Finally, the Court had to determine if sections 189, 196, and 198 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) could validly apply to the applicant once his bridging visa expired.

The Court reasoned that the legislative power granted by section 122 of the Constitution, which enabled Parliament to legislate concerning external territories, also extended to legislation dealing with the relinquishment of sovereign rights and administration over those territories. This power, it was held, allowed Parliament to treat inhabitants of a newly independent state, such as Papua New Guinea, as aliens. Consequently, the Court concluded that the applicant had indeed ceased to be an Australian citizen under the *Australian Citizenship Act 1948* (Cth) upon Papua New Guinea's independence, and that regulation 4 of the *Papua New Guinea Independence (Australian Citizenship) Regulations 1975* was validly authorised by section 6 of the *Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975* (Cth). The Court found no constitutional infirmity in these legislative actions.

The Court answered the questions posed in the Case Stated. It held that the applicant did cease to be an Australian citizen on Independence Day, that regulation 4 was authorised by section 6 of the *Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975* (Cth), and that section 6 was not invalid. The Court further determined that sections 189, 196, and 198 of the *Migration Act 1958* (Cth) were capable of valid application to the applicant on the basis that he was an alien. The applicant was ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings.