“Ultimately, these citizens are our responsibility. It would be wrong to let them stay in another country unchecked, with the chance they could create even more harm to Australia. The message needs to be clear – if you support a terrorist organisation here or overseas, there will be consequences under Australian law,” he said.

“While most Australians are rightly appalled that our citizens have travelled into war zones to support terrorist organisations like ISIS, that does not mean we should shirk our international obligations to repatriate these citizens to Australia where they can be dealt with according to law and if convicted imprisoned.”

“The introduction of TEOs could have the effect of rendering an Australian unable to legally enter Australia – or indeed any other country – while the order is in place. Hence, these laws may be inconsistent with Australia’s international obligations.”

And while matters of national security and protecting Australians from terrorism are of utmost importance, Mr Moses continued, the federal government must ensure that responses are proportional, constitutional and take into account Australia’s international obligations, he posited.

“The Law Council does not support the establishment of the proposed TEO scheme and recommends the bill should not proceed.”

There are also serious questions, he added, regarding the constitutional validity of the legislation and reiterated: “There is no point enacting invalid laws”.

“The High Court has made it very clear that one of the primary rights of Australian citizenship is the ability to enter and leave without government interference. The alleged offences of people seeking to return to Australia cannot be excused but it is the Law Council’s view that they should be permitted to return to Australia, where they can Australian face justice. Australia has some of the most comprehensive anti-terrorism laws and the best security agencies” he said.

VIEW ALL

“Deterrence and accountability are vital cornerstones of the law. If alleged terrorists are brought back to Australia and prosecuted before our courts, this deterrent effect is important to help prevent others following the same path.”

The comments were provided on Friday, following the terrorist attack at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. But, speaking separately to Lawyers Weekly, LCA confirmed that the comments, and the position taken at the parliamentary hearing, were not issued in reference to that terrorist attack.

The advocacy group did, however, express its support for the NZ Law Society, tweeting: “We stand with NZ.”

Following the attack, allegedly perpetrated by Australian citizen Brendan Tarrant, NZ Law Society president Kathryn Beck released a statement to the nation’s lawyers, noting that the legal profession shared “a sense of horror and disbelief” at the events that unfolded.

“Who may be having to deal with some of the distressing details of the attack,” she wrote.

I urge the profession to come together, and work together, as a strong, caring and inclusive community. I am sure you will join me in expressing our deepest condolences and solidarity with the families, friends and communities suffering so deeply in the wake of this national tragedy.”