The government's contentious citizenship laws, aimed at stripping the Australian passports from dual citizens who are involved in terrorism, have been the subject of much consternation.
Members of Mr Abbott's cabinet, the Labor party and a number of legal luminaries have expressed their concerns about the powers given to the government.
Most are calling for a system giving central importance to the courts, with ministerial power only enacted if a person is convicted of a terrorism offence.
Critics include the Law Council of Australia and former national security law watchdog Bret Walker
But the Prime Minister says he believes the laws are sound.
"We are very confident, based on the advice we've had from a range of sources, that this legislation can avoid serious constitutional risk but again I want to stress the fundamental point here. This is about protecting the people of Australia. This is about ensuring that if you leave our country to fight with a terrorist army abroad, as far as is possible you don't come back."
While there have been many external critics, there is also caution within the cabinet itself.
Leaked cabinet details show that Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, Attorney General George Brandis and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull have expressed their opposition to the laws as they stand.
But Malcolm Turnbull insists he's not at odds with Tony Abbott over the proposal .
And he's told the ABC he's working closely with others to make sure the legislation conforms to the constitution.
"What is the point of passing a law if it's going to get knocked out in the High Court? Our country is under the rule of law, and the most important law is the constitution and it applies both to the governed, the people, and the government. So we have to make sure to the best of our ability that whatever laws we pass are consistent with the constitution. That is just doing the job of government in a competent and effective manner."
Shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus says Labor supports the idea of extending existing citizenship powers dealing with Australians who fight for other nation states to those who fight for terrorist groups.
But he says the opposition is uncomfortable with giving a minister the power to act against a person who has not been convicted of a terror offence.
"This is one of the most serious steps that any person, any Australian could face. It's not merely being sent to prison, this is the complete stripping of all rights as an Australian. Not just losing your right to vote, something that the High Court has expressed concern about in recent cases, but losing all your rights."
The former head of the Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation David Irvine says people have a right to expect to be safe on their own home ground.
Mr Irvine has told a law conference in Sydney that governments have an obligation ensure that the laws protect Australians from harm.
"Too much commentary, in my view has neglected to acknowledge that the security and safety of citizens living within our community is just as much a human right as the other civil liberties of individual citizens. And you have to ask yourself "Is there a point at which one has to be sacrificed in favour of the other? Or are they both, as I believe they should be complimentary elements of an indivisible whole."
It is unlikely that the laws will be debated before parliament returns from the long winter break in August.
Share
