Australian-born citizens who acquired dual citizenship between November 22, 1984 and April 3, 2002 in Australia, could get the shock of their lives when new ETIAS procedures take effect at Australian airports in mid-2025. The rude awakening that they’ve lost their Australian citizenship, due to Section 17 of the old 1948 Citizenship Act, will hit them like a ton of bricks—either during departure for the EU, or upon re-entry.

The operation of the ETIAS (European Travel Information and Authorisation System) procedures at international airports, in co-existence with amended and inconspicuous Section 17 of the 1948 Citizenship Act, could inadvertently lead to the mass detection by Australian authorities of these home-grown nationals who are unaware that Section 17 applies to them.

How Section 17 of the 1948 Citizenship Act still affects Australians

From 1948 until November 1984, Section 17 of the Act meant that only those born in Australia who acquired a second nationality – while residing overseas – lost their Australian Citizenship.

However, due to the amendment of Section 17 of the Act in November 1984, the stripping of first citizenship came to include Australian-born citizens who acquired dual citizenship while residing in Australia. In April 2002, Philip Ruddock, the immigration minister at the time, headed the act of repealing Section 17 as from 4th April 2002. However, the repealed act was not made retrospective and therefore it still impacts those Australians to whom it applies.

According to Home Affairs Freedom of Information Request – FA 23/02/00089: The Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (the Act) and its preceding legislation has never required people who wish to acquire Australian Citizenship to give up a previously acquired foreign citizenship.

However, up until 4 April 2002, the previous Australian Citizenship Act 1948 (the old Act) did contain an automatic loss provision (section 17 of the old Act) by which an adult who acquired the citizenship of another country may have automatically ceased to be an Australian citizen.’

In some circumstances, a child of someone who lost their Australian citizenship may have lost their Australian citizenship as a consequence (section 23 of the old Act).

Since the Australian Government repealed Section 17 in April 2002 without making the repeal retrospective, it still affects and is enforceable upon those citizens whose first nationality is Australian and who became dual citizens during the period to which the amended Section 17 applies. There is the option to apply to Home Affairs to resume the forfeited citizenship, but reinstatement of it is not automatically granted. The applicant must show good character and Home Affairs can reject the application on the grounds of, for example, criminal convictions.

Mr. Constantine Karageorge who obtained LL.M (Master of Laws) in Constitutional Law from University of Sydney Law School and is an independent researcher in the field of citizenship law (particularly Greek and Australian) says that the reason the repealed law was not retrospective “…was that it was thought (by the government) that those who chose the dual citizenship may have wanted to relinquish their Australian Citizenship thus retrospectively reinstating it defeated their purpose as it could be looked at as an imposition.

“In reality, Australia did not recognise dual citizenship until (April) 2002 and there was until 2002 an inconsistency in that those citizens born overseas had their dual nationality recognised but not those born in Australia.”

Many Australian-born dual citizens residing permanently overseas were not detected by the Australian Government and did not realise they were no longer Australian citizens until applying for Australian Citizenship for their children and/or renewing their Australian passport from outside the country.

This was the case for Australian-born Matthew Niall. He acquired Irish citizenship while he was a young man in Australia and then lived overseas for about two decades. When he attempted to apply for his children’s Australian Citizenship and renew his passport from overseas, Home Affairs informed him that he was no longer an Australian citizen and had not been a citizen since the acquisition of his second nationality due to Section 17. (Info sourced from ABC News article by Erin Handley 10/02/2023.)

Disturbingly, for many of the home-grown Aussies residing on home soil, the Australian Government has yet to detect and deem them as being “ex-citizens”. This means that most of them remain completely unaware, more than 20 years later, that the government had stripped them of their citizenship rights. The reason for the government’s lack of detection could be attributed to the unfulfilled obligation of the country that granted the second nationality to notify the Australian Government of the citizen’s acquisition of dual citizenship.

“The Australian Government was not made aware of Australian-born citizens who got the citizenship of another country unless so informed by the other country, which rarely happens,” says Mr Karageorge.

“There could be a large number (of ex-citizens) prior to the repeal of Section 17 of the Immigration Act in 2002.”

Another reason for the lack of detection and awareness is that evidently no red flags are raised about Section 17 during the domestic Australian passport renewal application process.

Consequently, many Australians unaware of their Section 17 circumstances have been able to continue to renew their Australian passports and travel on them without the government raising any issues. In addition, they have been able to continue to vote in elections, which does not signal loss of citizenship according to a report by the ABC in 2023.

ETIAS: A new gateway to detection

Mr Karageorge, a prominent expert in the Melbourne-based Greek dual citizenship FB group called Go Next-Level Greek Group, made the connection that the new ETIAS procedures could pose a high risk of unintended detection in relation to those Australians in the country to whom Section 17 pertains. He only became aware of this when dealing with a member’s query, a dual citizen, on which passports to use when departing from the non-EU country of first citizenship, and upon arrival at an EU country (and vice versa) given the new ETIAS legislation.

If the traveller wishes to depart from the non-EU first country of citizenship (such as Australia) and enter an EU country as a citizen (of Greece, for example), Mr Karageorge confirmed that the traveller will now need to present to airport authorities both non-EU and EU passports upon exit. This is required at departure to prove that the traveller does not require an ETIAS visa waiver, which by ETIAS law must be obtained by a traveller who holds only a non-EU passport and is from a country that is visa-exempt from entering the EU (such as Australia, U.S.A., UK, Canada and New Zealand).

Another requirement is that the names on both passports must identically match. Or an official document, for example a Name Change Certificate, must be presented at the airport with both passports to justify any name variations.

“ETIAS, although not intended, could be a way that the government finds out who got dual citizenship prior to the repeal of Section 17,” says Mr Karageorge. “The indirect effect of ETIAS legislation…will or can uncover those citizens who are deemed to have lost their Australian Citizenship.

“When one produces both passports at the airport, maybe they can be asked when they became dual citizens or records taken of their EU passports and later requests made to the respective EU country as to the date of their citizenship. So, it can be a way of detection…possibly…after exiting,” says Mr Karageorge.

“My concern is that when they produce both passports for ETIAS, both passports will be somehow recorded and sometime later (probably after they return to Australia) they will be advised of their loss of citizenship.”

The consequences and next steps for affected Australians

In addition, upon the notification of an Australian-born citizen losing their Australian Citizenship to Section 17 while in Australia, the government automatically grants a visa to the new “ex-citizen”, which “is a permanent visa that allows the person to live here, but it ends the moment the person departs the country”, as reported on the ABC by Erin Handley.

If Section 17 is widely unknown to those Australian citizens who acquired dual citizenship subject to this law, then it is unlikely that they are aware of these grounds for cancellation of their ex-citizen visa.

What will happen if the information that ETIAS collects alerts the government to a Section 17 case during the Australian’s departure? It would appear that the government would not grant the automatic ex-citizen visa upon return because the notification was received while the dual citizen in question was outside Australia.

Mr Karageorge believes that if the Australian is identified as not being an Australian citizen while overseas, then one would have no choice but to re-enter Australia on their EU passport after having obtained a temporary Australian visa. Next, submit the application to Home Affairs to resume their Australian Citizenship, which the department can accept or reject.

“If detected while they are overseas, they can re-enter Australia on a 90-day visa to fix up the problem”, says Mr Karageorge.

According to the Home Affairs website, this temporary visa – Subclass 601 visa/ETA – Electronic Travel Authority – allows for multiple entry during a 12-month period, but only for a 3-month stay in any one sitting. It can be used for tourist, family/friends/business/short study or training visits purposes.

The website states that: If you want to stay longer than 3 months at a time, you need to apply for a different visa that suits your circumstances. You must be outside Australia when you apply for the ETA and outside Australia when the visa is granted. Therefore, what will happen to those Australians who lose their citizenship while visiting the EU due to using their Greek passport, for example, to enter the EU? How will the Australian Government ensure that it notifies them and informs them prior to EU departure that they must have obtained a temporary visa to re-enter Australia?

In another scenario, if the ETIAS procedure can immediately expose the absence of Australian Citizenship during preparation for passenger departure for the EU, then on the spot and in disbelief of the situation, the previously unaware Australian in question could be forced then and there to make a major decision.

Either proceed with departure, having been informed of the loss of Australian Citizenship, and return on a temporary visa and apply to Home Affairs to hopefully resume citizenship. Or about-face at the airport, go back home and cancel all travel plans and bookings in order to retain the automatically granted ex-citizen visa, which affords them the luxury of an unrestricted timeframe in which to apply to resume their Australian Citizenship.

Whichever scenario unfolds, the indirect effects of ETIAS procedures to be implemented at international airports in the coming months could very likely to trigger a harrowing series of events for those Australians with Section 17 circumstances who remain unaware of their loss of Australian Citizenship and undetected by the government.

The fact is that Aussie travellers have no idea what information ETIAS will collect from them at the international airport intersection and pass onto the Australian Government. Furthermore, neither ETIAS nor the Australian Government has ensured that the average person with Australian and EU citizenship understands what to expect at and beyond the International Departure Gate or what the implications could be and this is of particular concern to Australians travelling under Section 17 circumstances.

* Danae Andrea Konidaris is the author of ‘Guide to Your Greek Citizenship’.