In 2016 the government expanded section 35 of the Citizenship Act to revoke the citizenship of any Australian who joins a foreign terrorist group. The measure includes Australians with single and dual citizenship and was proposed after several Australian nationals joined ISIS in the Middle East. The previous law revokes citizenship if Australians take up arms with the militaries of ‘enemy states’ but does not cover foreign terrorist organziations. Opponents include human rights groups and constitutional lawyers who argue that the law allows foreign governments to accuse people of terrorism for minor acts including graffiti and sit in protests. Proponents argue that the law is necessary to prevent terrorists re-entering the country.
If they originate and grew to adulthood in a foreign country then yes they should lose the privilege of being a NZ citizen. If they were born and grew up in NZ then they shouldn't lost their Citizenship, they are a product of our nation and should remain our problem.
There is a complete bias for what is counted as a terrorist organisation. People who are anti-fascist are terrorists in the USA but the Ku-klux-klan are not terrorists even though they actively and historically oppress people. It should be case dependent.
No, because u can never be sure who is part of a terrorist group/organisation - especially when in the majority it's privileged countries telling us who is a terrorist. The people making the decision in the governments/countries have (pale skin/European ethnicity) (rich/wealthy, male) - corrupt governments telling people who are terrorists (on the news/media)
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion