An Australian woman linked to Islamic State (IS) will return home from Syria after the government granted her a permit. The last in the cohort of so-called “ISIS brides”, she will be allowed to re-enter Australia with her child.
Of the group, she was previously the only one to be temporarily barred from coming home because she’d been subject to a government-issued “temporary exclusion order”.
Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke, who originally issued the order earlier this year, said the government “received the final advice yesterday that we can no longer have an exclusion condition any longer for her”.
While the situation will likely be politically difficult for the government, evidence shows it’s the safest course of action for all involved – and the only legal one.
The laws of exclusion
Under domestic counterterrorism law, Australia can stop a citizen suspected of sympathising with or acting for a terrorist organisation from coming back by issuing a temporary exclusion order.
These orders mean the government refuses to issue the relevant documentation to allow someone to fly internationally, essentially blocking them from moving. The orders can apply for up to two years.
But citizens, specifically those without dual citizenship with another country, can apply for a permit to return to Australia. These permits essentially function as temporary, single-use passports.
It’s a basic tenet of both international and domestic law that a government must ensure a citizen can return to their home country. The government doesn’t have to take a proactive role in this, but it does need to do the bare minimum to facilitate a citizen’s travel.
While we don’t know the precise circumstances of the woman at the centre of this case, it would seem the government didn’t have a strong legal argument for stopping her return. Burke said he was unable to legally refuse the application, and so issued the permit.
So if the law says citizens must be able to return to their country of citizenship, what’s the point of a temporary exclusion order?
They’re a stopgap solution to give authorities time to do background checks, make surveillance arrangements and consider if they want to make any prosecutions. It seems that groundwork was done, with Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) Director-General Mike Burgess saying:
ASIO is not all-seeing and all-knowing and we don’t want to be, but I can assure [you] that actually the full use of my organisation’s capability and powers will be used when this individual returns to this country.
Safety in surveillance
The woman is the last of a group of Australian women who left the country during the 2010s to join IS. Many had been in limbo since the caliphate collapsed in 2019, living in Syrian camps.
Earlier this year, four IS families were allowed to return to Australia. Of those, multiple women were charged with crimes against humanity, including slave-related offences.
These women were among around 60 Australians detained in the camps. All have returned over the years.
It’s understandable people may not want potentially radicalised women and children in the community. But not only is it legally necessary, it’s also much safer than leaving them in Syria.
ASIO has previously warned it’s much easier to monitor potential risks on home soil.
Indeed, the woman in this case will be subject to strict conditions on her return, including having to provide 24 hours’ notice to authorities if she wants to use the internet or a phone “for any reason”.
Australia also has the resources and expertise to establish effective rehabilitation programs.
Alleviating propaganda risks
Aside from the moral imperative, there was also a real risk that leaving women in dilapidated Syrian camps could radicalise more people, both around them and across the world.
In this era, an Australian citizen on social media with a powerful story about exclusion could be used as compelling IS propaganda.
Islamic State-aligned people in the camps are known to exert hostile and violent control over fellow campers. Australians not allowed home make for highly effective fodder for social media.
Neil Prakash, who had his Australian citizenship revoked in 2018 after travelling to Syria to join IS in 2013, featured prominently in online propaganda content. He was strong online recruiter for the group. It was possible other Australians left overseas could be used in the same way, whether by choice or coercion.
But Australia has the resources and security intelligence to manage any threats returning IS families may pose, including the woman most recently granted permission to return. As counterintuitive as it may seem, everyone is safer when they’re on Australian soil.
