High Court Overturns Ankle Bracelet and Curfew Laws for Former Detainees
In a significant legal blow to the Albanese government, Australia's High Court has once again struck down stringent laws targeting the NZYQ group of former immigration detainees. The ruling mandates the removal of ankle bracelets and the cessation of curfews for 43 individuals who have already served prison sentences, declaring these measures unconstitutional.
Court Ruling Details and Immediate Impact
On Wednesday, the High Court, led by Chief Justice Stephen Gageler and supported by a majority of the seven justices, found that the amended laws from November 2024 were inconsistent with the constitution and therefore invalid. Justice Michelle Gordon emphasized in her reasoning that the law's purpose of protecting the community was insufficient, and any justification for ongoing monitoring must be exceptional, such as preventing a terrorist attack.
As a result, those subject to electronic monitoring and curfew conditions will have their ankle bracelets removed and instead be required to regularly report to officials. The government is now prohibited from imposing curfews on this cohort.
Background of the Case and Government Response
The case was initiated by a Papua New Guinea citizen, known as EGH19 in court documents, who arrived in Australia in 2000 and was convicted of murder in 2006 as a minor. After being offered a protection visa in 2022, it was cancelled following his guilty plea to domestic violence offences. Released on parole in December 2024, he was placed in immigration detention in April 2025 and subjected to ankle bracelet and curfew requirements.
Following the ruling, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke expressed gratitude for a $2.5 billion deal with Nauru to remove the NZYQ cohort from Australia, stating, "Fortunately, we now have the agreement with Nauru because the best thing for people who have had their visa cancelled is to not be in this country." Under this arrangement, the government can apply for 30-year Nauruan visas for those released on bridging visas pending removal.
Political and Advocacy Reactions
Shadow Home Affairs Minister Jonathon Duniam criticized the government, noting that assurances were given in 2024 that the laws would withstand High Court scrutiny. "Well, he was wrong. These laws have been struck out, so this government needs to come forward with new laws," Duniam asserted, pledging opposition cooperation.
Advocacy groups also weighed in. Jana Favero, deputy chief executive of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, accused the government of "making rushed laws on the run, with no regard for fairness or our country's constitution." Greg Barns SC, spokesperson for the Australian Lawyers Alliance, condemned the government for succumbing to "populist scare mongering by the media and its political opponents," highlighting the court's role in upholding constitutional powers.
Historical Context and Broader Implications
The preventative detention regime was introduced in late 2023 after the High Court ruled indefinite detention unlawful, leading to the release of over 300 individuals, including refugees and stateless people. In November 2024, the court found the subsequent monitoring regime unconstitutional, prompting amendments to limit conditions to those posing a substantial risk of serious harm.
As of June 2025, data indicated 346 bridging visa removal holders, with EGH19 among 46 subject to both ankle bracelets and a 10pm-6am curfew. An additional 41 were under ankle monitoring, and only one faced solely a curfew requirement. This ruling underscores ongoing tensions between government policy and judicial oversight in immigration matters.
